Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 4704  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    

Year : 2009  |  Volume : 53  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 52-56 Table of Contents     

A Preliminary Study of I-Gel: A New Supraglottic Airway Device

1 Lecturer, Department of Anaesthesiology & Critical Care, S N. Medical College, Agra, India
2 Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology & Critical Care, S N. Medical College, Agra, India
3 PG Students, Department of Anaesthesiology & Critical Care, S N. Medical College, Agra, India

Date of Web Publication3-Mar-2010

Correspondence Address:
Ashish Kannaujia
Department of anaesthesia and critical care. S.N. Medical College Agra
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

PMID: 20640078

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

This preliminary study on I-gel TM (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham,U K) was conducted on 50 consecutive pa­tients of ASA physical status I-III, to determine the ease of insertion, time to achieve effective airway, oropharyngeal seal pressure and airway stability on head and neck movement.
After premedication with midazolam and fentanyl, induction was done with propofol and I-gel was inserted according to manufacturer's instruction. An effective airway was confirmed by bilateral chest movement, square wave on capnograph and SpO 2 >95%.
The success rate at first attempt was 90% with a median insertion time of 11 sec (range 8-45sec). Five patients (10%) needed second attempt while none needed 3 rd attempt. The manipulation needed to achieve effective airway were increasing the depth of insertion of I-gel in 4 (8%) cases , jaw thrust or chin lift in2(4%) cases. Oropharyngeal seal pressure was 20 cm of H 2 O (16-40 cm of H 2 O). Gastric tube placement was done in 50% of the cases; it was easy and successful in all the cases. No significant adverse event was noted in any of the patient in perioperative period.
Our initial experience showed that I-gel is a simple, easy to use supraglottic airway device with a high success rate at first time insertion.

Keywords: I-gel, Supraglottic airway device, Non-inflatable mask, Oropharyngeal seal pressure

How to cite this article:
Kannaujia A, Srivastava U, Saraswat N, Mishra A, Kumar A, Saxena S. A Preliminary Study of I-Gel: A New Supraglottic Airway Device. Indian J Anaesth 2009;53:52-6

How to cite this URL:
Kannaujia A, Srivastava U, Saraswat N, Mishra A, Kumar A, Saxena S. A Preliminary Study of I-Gel: A New Supraglottic Airway Device. Indian J Anaesth [serial online] 2009 [cited 2020 Jan 25];53:52-6. Available from:

   Introduction Top

I-gel TM (Intersurgical Ltd, Wokingham,U.K.) is a new supraglottic airway device with anatomically de­signed, non inflatable mask, which is soft, gel like and transparent, made of thermoplastic elastomer [1] . The soft, non inflatable cuff fits snugly onto the perilaryngeal framework and its tip lies in the proximal opening of the oesophagus, isolating the oropharyngeal opening from the laryngealinlet. The outer cuff shape ensures that the blood flow to the laryngeal and perilaryngeal framework is maintained and helps the possibility to reduce neurovascular compression trauma to the nerves. The device has buccal cavity stabilizer which has propensity to adopt its shape to oropharyngeal curvature of the patients. It is an atomically widened and concaved to eliminate the potential for rotation, thereby reducing the risk of malposition. This buccalcavity sta­bilizer houses airway tubing and separate gastric chan­nel. The tube section is firmer than the soft bowl of the gastric channel. The firmness of tube section and its natural oropharyngeal curvature allows the device to be inserted by grasping the proximal end of it against the hard palate into the pharynx without inserting the fingers into the mouth of the patients [1] . The smooth con­tiguous surface of the device from the tip of the bowl to the proximal end of the tube, allows the device to eas­ily slide posteriorly along the hard palate, pharynx and hypopharynx. The device has integral bite block which is marked with a horizontally placed black line, which acts as a guide to depth of insertion. The device also has a channel for gastric tube drain (except size 1), which runs through the device from its proximal opening at the slide of flat connector wing to the distal tip of the non inflatable mask. The gastric channel allows suc­tion, detection of leak and passage of gastric tube. The maximum size of gastric tube which can be passed through different sizes is given in [Table 1]. The device also has an epiglottic blocker [Figure 1] which prevents downfolding of the epiglottis and obstruction of the distal opening airway.

The size of I-gel is selected according to patient's body weight [Table 1]. I-gel can be used for intubation as a conduit.The maximum size of endotracheal tube which can be passed through the definite size I-gel is given in [Table 1].

   Methods Top

Fifty consecutive patients of either sex belonging to ASA physical status I-III were recruited for this study after approval from institutional ethical commit­tee with informed written consent. The patients with anticipated difficult airway, pregnancy, obesity and those who required surgery in positions other than supine or lithotomy position or required IPPV were excluded from the study.

All the patients received oral alprazolam and ranitidine in the night before surgery and in the morning on the day of surgery. In the operation room an IV line was secured and monitors were applied which included ECG, pulseoximetry and capnography. Induction of anaesthesia in each case was done in supine position with the head on the standard pillow (7-10 cm). Pa­tients were given, fentanyl (1-1.5µ -1 ) and midazolam (0.02 -1 body weight). After preoxygenation for 3 minutes, each patient received induction dose of propofol (2-2.5 -1 ) over 30-40 seconds with end point of induction being loss of eyelash reflex. Face mask ventilation was done with 33% O 2 in N 2 O and 1-2% of halothane until optimal conditions for I-gel in­sertion were attained (Jaw relaxation, no movement). Additional increments of propofol were given as and when required until level of anaesthesia adequate for insertion of device was achieved. The insertion of I-gel was done according to manufacturer's instruction. The front, back and sides of the cuff were lubricated with water based jelly. The patient's head was placed in 'sniffing the morning air' position. The lubricated de­vice was grasped along the integral bite block and was introduced into the mouth in the direction towards the hard palate and was glided downwards and backwards along the hard palate until definite resistance was felt. The device was connected to breathing circuit and patientventilated manually. An effective airway was con­firmed by bilateral symmetrical chest movement, square waveform on capnograph and normal SpO 2 (>95%). The device was secured with adhesive tape.

If the airway was not effective, manipulations were done in the form of increasing the depth of insertion, giving jaw thrust or chin lift or changing size of the de­vice. If it was not possible to maintain an effective air­way after 3 insertion attempts; the device was taken as failure and alternative technique (proseal-LMA or ETT) was used.

Ventilation of patient was manually assisted until the spontaneous breathing resumed. Oropharyngeal seal pressure was determined by closing the expiratory valve at a fixed gas flow of 5 L/min (Magill circuit) and re­cording the airway pressure at which the gas leaked intothe mouth [2] .

Anaesthesia was maintained on O 2 , N 2 O (66%) and halothane (1-2%) with spontaneous ventilation.

Toward sthe end of the procedure but before dis­continuing anaesthetic, the stability of the device was evaluated in different head/neck positions. This involved placing the head and neck in four sequential positions ­head on standard pillow, head rotated to side, chin lift, and head without standard pillow and recording five consecutive tidal volumes under a constant levelof an­esthesia depth [3] . At the end of procedure all the pa­tients breathed 100% O 2 during emergence from ana­esthesia. The device was removed when patient was able to open the mouth on command. The patient was inspected about any injury to the lips, teeth or tongue and device was inspected for any blood stain.

   Results Top

The patient characteristics and type of surgeries are shown in [Table 2].

Size 3 was used in 84% of cases and size 4 was used in 16%. In 2 patients the device was replaced with larger size to achieve better seal.

The device was easy to insert and remove. The success rate at first attempt was 45/50 (90%) with a median insertion time of 11 seconds (range 8-45 sec­onds). Five patients needed 2 nd attempt while none needed 3 rd attempt or had failure of insertion. The most common manipulations to achieve effective airway was increasing the depth of insertion of I-gel (8%). Airway manipulations in the form of chin lift or jaw thrust were needed in 2% patients [Table 3]. In two cases the de­vice was replaced with a larger size to achieve better seal.

Oropharyngeal leak pressure was 20cm of wa­ter (range 16-40).

Gastric tube placement was done only in 50% of the patients and it was easy and successful in each case. No patient had gastric distention. There was no clinical evidence of aspiration in any patient.

No significant adverse event was noted in any patient. The incidence of adverse events during perioperative period was low [Table 4]. Two patients (4%) had suboptimal oxygenation (SpO 2 <95%) for which airway manipulation in the form of increasing the depth of insertion was done which rectified the prob­lem. None of the patient suffered hypoxia (SpO 2 <90%). During emergence 2 patients (4%) had cough and 2 (4%) patient complained of sore throat in the postoperative period which subsided within 24 hrs. None of the patient complained of dysphonia or dysphagia.

   Discussion Top

The results of the present clinical trial have shown many advantages of I-gel. These include high success rate at first attempt, easy insertion and shorter time to achieve effective airway. The additional advantages are high seal pressure and stability of device despite changes in position of head and neck. All the anaesthetists stated that the placement of I-gel was certainly easier than any other currently available su­praglottic device. This greater stability is primarily re­lated to the anatomical design of the non-inflatable cuff. The ridge at the proximal end of mask catches the base of tongue thus prevents the device from moving and so contributes to the positional stability of the device after placement [4] . Since no cuff inflation is needed in this device, there is shorter time to achieve effective air­way.

A supraglottic airway device without inflatable cuff has some potential advantages including easier inser­tion and minimal risk of tissue compression [5],[6],[7] whereas supraglottic device with inflatable cuff can absorb an­esthetic gases leading to increased mucosal pressure [8] . I-­gel may find a place during CPR due to high success rateat first attempt along with quick insertion time [9],[10] . Also, easy ventilation of chest without air leak during chest compression may have additional advantage.

Intra operative problems like arterial desaturation and haemodynamic changes were not seen inany pa­tient probably due to shorter time for successful place­ment of the device.

As this is a new device very little published data is available regarding its use during anaesthesia. Most of the studies are manikin or cadaver studies and thes eare mainly aimed to evaluate the ease of success of insertion by non-anaesthetist. I-gel has been found to have easi­est insertion in various types of manikins [11] . Levitan and Kinkle [4] studied the positioning and mechanics of this de­vice in 65 non embalmed cadavers with endoscopies and neck dissections. Aglottic opening score (POGO) of >50% was obtained in all 65 cases. In each of the neck dissections the bowl of device was found covering the laryngeal inlet. In a study on cadavers, I-Gel was consistently positioned over laryngeal inlet as confirmed by endoscopy, radiography and dissection [4] . It was also used to facilitate endotracheal intubation [12] .

We concluded that I-gel is a simple, excellent and easy to use supraglottic airway device. It is easy to insert without need of many manipulations with mainte­nance of airway in a short time. The device is very effective and useful for adult patients requiring surgical procedures of 30-60 minutes duration while breathing spontaneously. We strongly believe that I-gel may be­come very popular due to its superior qualities of speedy yet successful insertion and ventilation. How­ever more studies with large number of patients are required to further validate our results before recommending its widespread use. Our study was conducted on spontaneously breathing anaesthetized patients, we didnot studied it for controlled ventilation.

   References Top

1.I-gel instruction mannual 2007.  Back to cited text no. 1      
2.Keller C, Brimacombe J, Keller K and Morris R. Acom­parison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult pa­tients. Br J Anaesth1999; 82: 286-287.  Back to cited text no. 2      
3.Brimacombe JR, et al. Acomparison of laryngeal mask airway and cuffed oropharyngeal airway in anaesthe­tized adult patients. AnesthAnalg1998; 87:147-52.  Back to cited text no. 3      
4.Levitan RM, Kinkle WC. Initial anatomic investigation of the I-gel airway: a novel supraglottic airway without inflatable cuff. Anaesthesia 2005;60:1022-6.  Back to cited text no. 4      
5.TwingS, BrownJMWilliamsR. Swelling and cyanosis of the tongue associated with use of a laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care 2000;28: 449-50.  Back to cited text no. 5      
6.Stewat A, Lindsay WA. Bilateral hypoglossal nerve in­jury following the use of laryngeal mask airway.Anaes­thesia2002;57:264-5.  Back to cited text no. 6      
7.Lowinger D, Benjamin B, Gadd L. Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury caused by a laryngeal mask airway. Anaes­thesia and IntensiveCare 1999;27:202-5.  Back to cited text no. 7      
8.Ouellete R G. The effect of nitrous oxide on laryngeal mask cuff pressure. American Association of Nurse Anesthetist Journal 2000;68:411-414.  Back to cited text no. 8      
9.J. Soar. The I-gel supraglottic airway and resuscitation-some initial thoughts. JResuscitation2007; 02:01211.  Back to cited text no. 9      
10.Gabbot D, R Beringer. The I-gel supraglottic airway: A potential role for resuscitation? Resuscitation 2007; 73:161-164.  Back to cited text no. 10      
11.Jackson KM, CookTM, Evaluation of four airway train­ing manikins as patient simulators for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthe­sia2007;62:388-393.  Back to cited text no. 11      
12.Sharma S, Rogers R, Popat M. The I-gel airway for ven­tilation and rescue intubation.Anaesthesia 2007;62:419-­420.  Back to cited text no. 12      


  [Figure 1]

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]


    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

  In this article
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded688    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal