
AIRWAY DEVICE
Author(s) -
Ali Ammar,
Liaqat Ali,
Naseem Ali Sheikh,
Shamila Athar Siddique
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
the professional medical journal/the professional medical journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2071-7733
pISSN - 1024-8919
DOI - 10.29309/tpmj/2010.17.04.3014
Subject(s) - medicine , laryngeal mask airway , laryngospasm , insertion time , airway , anesthesia , airway management , significant difference , general anaesthesia , american society of anesthesiologists , surgery , statistical analysis , statistics , mathematics
Intersurgical-gel (I-gel) is a new supraglottic airway device that is widely being used to secure airway during general anaesthesia. Objectives: The objective of the study is to compare the ease of insertion of Intersurgical-gel and Laryngeal mask airway (LMA). Material & Method: This study was conducted in Department of anaesthesia Hameed Latif Hospital, Lahore. 100 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-II, patients were enrolled in this study for elective surgery divided in 2 groups of 50 each. LMA and I-gel were used in groups A and B respectively for intra operative maintenance of airway. Randomization through random number table in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17 was used. Results: There were 50 patients in both groups. There were no statistical significant difference between the patients age of two groups. There was absolutely no difference between 2 groups regarding ease of insertion because both groups had 84% easy and 16% satisfactory insertions. Insertion time of LMA and I-gel in First and Second attempt were also comparable and statistically nonsignificant. Airway manipulations was required in both groups for insertion of device, in LMA group 30% required and 70% did not require and in i-gel group 48% required and 52% did not require. There is no statistical significant difference between both groups. Bleeding was noticed on 2% of i-gel and with LMA no bleeding occurred and 2% laryngospasm incidence noticed in both groups. Conclusion: we found that regarding ease of insertion there is statistically no significant difference between I-gel and LMA.