A prospective double blind randomized controlled clinical study comparing intubation with LMA and I-gel for ease of insertion
European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine,
2020, Volume 7, Issue 10, Pages 3988-3995
AbstractAim: The aim of this study to compare the intubating LMA and I-gel for ease of insertion and as a conduit for endotracheal intubation.
Methods: A prospective double blind randomized controlled study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesia, Jawahar Lal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India, for 15 months. A total of 100 patients were randomly assigned using a chit method into two groups of 50 each. One group will be allocated I-LMA (group L) and other I-GEL (group G). Randomization will be done using concealed envelop technique. All patients will be administered injection glycopyrolate (0.004mg/kg), injection ranitidine (50mg i.v), injection ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg i.v), injection Nalbuphine (0.2mg/kg I.V) before induction. Preoxygenation with 100% oxygen for 3 minutes. Induction will be done with injection Propofol (2.5 mg/kg i.v). I-gel no.3 will be used for female and no. 4 will be used for male. Endotracheal tube size 6.5 mm/7mm for female and size 7mm/7.5mm will be used for male. Endotracheal tube will be introduced through I-gel/I-LMA.
Results: The 100 patients selected for the study were randomized into two groups of 50 each. One of the group was administered the I-gel (Group G) and the other group was given I-LMA (Group L). Both groups shown statistically significant difference in weight and height but both the groups were comparable in terms of mean age, sex distribution, and BMI.It was observed that insertion I-gel was easy in 41 out of 50 patients. Difficult insertion took place in 9 patients. It was observed that I-lma insertion was easy in 46 out of 50 patients.Difficult to insertion took place in 4 patients. The comparison of ease of insertion between the two groups did not reveal any statistical significance (p>0.05).I-gel was placed in first attempt in 48 out of 50 patients, 2 patients needed second attempt. The I-LMA was placed in first attempt in 46 out of 50 patients. 4 patients required second attempt for insertion and no patients required third attempt. Endotracheal tube via I-gel was placed in first attempt in 33 out of 50 patients, 6 patients required second attempt for insertion and 11 required third attempt.
Conclusion: The time taken to insert ET tube via I-LMA is significantly less than that of. I-gel. I-gel can be used as a conduit for endotracheal intubation. Though it is an effective SAD, it is slightly inferior to LMA Fast track as the intubating device.
- Article View: 62
- PDF Download: 163