Advertisement!
Author Information Pack
Editorial Board
Submit article
Special Issue
Editor's selection process
Join as Reviewer/Editor
List of Reviewer
Indexing Information
Most popular articles
Purchase Single Articles
Archive
Free Online Access
Current Issue
Recommend this journal to your library
Advertiser
Accepted Articles
Search Articles
Email Alerts
FAQ
Contact Us
Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia

Volume  5, Issue 8, August 2018, Pages 1339-1343
 

Original Article

IGEL Versus Proseal LMA in Short Elective Procedures: A Comparision of Clinical Performance

Kiran Bada Revappa1, Sagar S. Majigowdar2

1Associate Professor 2Professor, Dept. of Anesthesia, S.S. Institute of Medical Sciences (SSIMS), Davanagere, Karnataka 577005, India.

Choose an option to locate / access this Article:
90 days Access
Check if you have access through your login credentials.        PDF      |
|

Open Access: View PDF

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.5818.14

Abstract

Background: The various supraglottic airway devices with their advent have created a revolution in the management of airway. We have made an attempt to compare the clinical performance of the two types of supraglottic devices namely Igel and LMA proseal during general anesthesia in spontaneously breathing patients.

Materials and Methods: Sixty ASA grade I and II adult patients of either sex were randomly assigned into two groups. Group I (n=30) for I-gel and Group P (n=30) LMA ProSeal. We assessed the ease of insertion, attempts for insertion, ease of gastric tube placement, airway sealing pressure and postoperative sore throat and hoarseness of voice. Results: There were no significant differences in
demographic data. The airway sealing pressure was higher with Group P (27.87±2.29cm H 2O) than with Group I (23.77 ±2.13cm H 2O) (p < 0.05). The ease of insertion was comparable between Group I (29/30) with Group P (26/30) (> 0.05). The success rate of first attempt of insertion was 29/30 in Igel and 28/30 in proseal group (p> 0.05). Ryles tube could be inserted easily in all the 30 patients of each of the two groups. The adverse effects like Blood stain on LMA coughing on insertion, sore throat and hoarseness assessed at 6 hours and 24 hours of postoperative period were statistically insignificant among the two groups.

Conclusions: Proseal provides a better airway sealing pressure than Igel with comparable performance in ease of insertion , number of attempts at insertion and postoperative adverse events.


Keywords : Airway Sealing Pressure; Hoarseness; I-gel; Proseal; Sore Throat.
Corresponding Author : Sagar S. Majigowdar, Professor, Department of Anesthesia, S.S. Institute of Medical Sciences (SSIMS), Davanagere, Karnataka 577005, India.