Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 869  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    


CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 56  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 348-352

Randomized crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask airway classic with i-gel laryngeal mask airway in the management of difficult airway in post burn neck contracture patients


1 Department of Anaesthesia, Dhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences (KUSMS) Post Box Number: 11008, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal
2 Sushma Koirala Memorial Hospital for Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shankhu, Kathmandu, Nepal
3 Department of Community Medicine, Dhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences (KUSMS) Post Box Number: 11008, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal
4 Department of ENT, Dhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences (KUSMS) Post Box Number: 11008, Dhulikhel, Kavre, Nepal

Correspondence Address:
Jeevan Singh
Department of Anaesthesia, Dhulikhel Hospital, Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences (KUSMS) Post Box Number: 11008, Dhulikhel, Kavre
Nepal
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.100815

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The objective of the study was to compare the performance of i-gel supraglottic airway with cLMA in difficult airway management in post burn neck contracture patients and assess the feasibility of i-gel use for emergency airway management in difficult airway situation with reduced neck movement and limited mouth opening. Methods: Prospective, crossover, randomized controlled trial was performed amongst forty eight post burn neck contracture patients with limited mouth opening and neck movement. i-gel and cLMA were placed in random order in each patient. Primary outcome was overall success rate. Other measurements were time to successful ventilation, airway leak pressure, fiberoptic glottic view, visualization of square wave pattern. Results: Success rate for the i-gel was 91.7% versus 79.2% for the cLMA. i-gel required shorter insertion time (19.3 seconds vs. 23.5 seconds, P=0.000). Airway leak pressure difference was statistically significant (i-gel 21.2 cm H20; cLMA 16.9 cm H 2 0; P=0.00). Fiberoptic view through the i-gel showed there were less epiglottic downfolding and better fiberoptic view of the glottis than cLMA. Overall agreement in insertion outcome for i-gel was 22/24 (91.7%) successes and 2/24(8.3%) failure and for cLMA, 19/24 (79.16%) successes and 5/24 (16.7%) failure in the first attempt. Conclusion: The i-gel is cheap, effective airway device which is easier to insert and has better clinical performance in the difficult airway management of the airway in the post burn contracture of the neck. Our study shows that i-gel is feasible for emergency airway management in difficult airway situation with reduced neck movement and limited mouth opening in post burn neck.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3913    
    Printed142    
    Emailed2    
    PDF Downloaded855    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 6    

Recommend this journal