Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 1593  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    


CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 58  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 397-402

Comparison of supraglottic devices i-gel ® and LMA Fastrach ® as conduit for endotracheal intubation


Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management, Mahatma Gandhi University of Medical Science and Technology, Sitapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Priyamvada Gupta
3/592, Pradhan Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302 017
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.138969

Clinical trial registration REF/2013/12/006091

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: i-gel®, a recently introduced supraglottic airway device (SAD) has been claimed to be an efficient supraglottic airway. It can also be used as a conduit for endotracheal intubation. However, LMA Fastrach® frequently used for this purpose; hence in this randomized study, success rate of blind tracheal intubation through two different SADs i-gel® and LMA Fastrach® was evaluated. The complications if any were also studied. Methods: A total of 100 patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised in two groups comprising of 50 patients each to tracheal intubation using either i-gel (I group) or LMA Fastrach (F group). After induction of anaesthesia SAD was inserted and on achieving adequate ventilation with the device, blind tracheal intubation was attempted through the SAD. Success at first-attempt and overall tracheal intubation success rates were evaluated, and tracheal intubation time was measured. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20.0 software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences by International Business Machines Corporation). P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: There was no difference in the incidence of adequate ventilation with either of the SAD. The success rate of tracheal intubation in first attempt was 66% in Group I and 74% in Group F, while overall success rate of tracheal intubation was 82% in Group I when compared to 96% in Group F. Time taken for successful tracheal intubation through LMA Fastrach was lesser (20.96 s) when compared to i-gel (24.04 s). Complication rates were statistically similar in both the groups. Conclusion: i-gel® is a better device for rescue ventilation due to its quick insertion but an inferior intubating device in comparison to LMA Fastrach®.


[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
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed8124    
    Printed52    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded1165    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal