Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Int Med Res. 2016 Jun;44(3):405-18. doi: 10.1177/0300060515607386. Epub 2016 Mar 23.

Comparison of oropharyngeal leak pressure and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ and i-gel® in adults: Meta-analysis and systematic review.

Author information

1
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea hwshin99@yahoo.com.
2
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
3
Institute for Evidence-based Medicine, Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials to compare the oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) and clinical performance of LMA ProSeal™ (Teleflex® Inc., Wayne, PA, USA) and i-gel® (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham, UK) in adults undergoing general anesthesia.

METHODS:

Searches of MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, CENTRAL, KoreaMed and Google Scholar® were performed. The primary objective was to compare OLP; secondary objectives included comparison of clinical performance and complications.

RESULTS:

Fourteen RCTs were included. OLP was significantly higher with LMA ProSeal™ than with i-gel® (mean difference [MD] -2.95 cmH2O; 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.30, -1.60). The i-gel® had shorter device insertion time (MD -3.01 s; 95% CI -5.80, -0.21), and lower incidences of blood on device after removal (risk ratio [RR] 0.32; 95% CI 0.18, 0.56) and sore throat (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35, 0.89) than LMA ProSeal™.

CONCLUSION:

LMA ProSeal™ provides superior airway sealing compared to i-gel®.

KEYWORDS:

Airway sealing; equipment; i-gel®; laryngeal mask airway proseal; leak; meta-analysis

PMID:
27009026
PMCID:
PMC5536706
DOI:
10.1177/0300060515607386
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center