These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: LMA ProSeal(TM) vs. i-Gel(TM) in ventilated children: a randomised, crossover study using the size 2 mask.
    Author: Gasteiger L, Brimacombe J, Oswald E, Perkhofer D, Tonin A, Keller C, Tiefenthaler W.
    Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand; 2012 Nov; 56(10):1321-4. PubMed ID: 22946775.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) are two extraglottic devices with either an inflatable cuff or a non-inflatable cuff. AIM: We test the hypothesis that oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic position of the airway tube differ between the size 2 LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) in non-paralysed ventilated children. METHODS: Fifty-one children aged 1.5-6 years weighing 10-25 kg were studied using a crossover design. Anaesthesia was with remifentanil/propofol mixture. The LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) were inserted into each patient in random order. RESULTS: Oropharyngeal leak pressure for the LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) was similar at 22 (5) and 21 (5) cm H(2) O, respectively. Fiberoptic position of the airway tube for the LMA ProSeal(TM) and the i-Gel(TM) was similar, with the vocal cords visible from the distal airway tube in 94% and 96%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We conclude that oropharyngeal leak pressure and fiberoptic position of the airway tube are similar for the size 2 LMA ProSeal(TM) and i-Gel(TM) in non-paralysed ventilated children.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]