Evidence Hub

Comparison of the Intersurgical Solus laryngeal mask airway and the i-gel supralaryngeal device

Amini S, Khoshfetrat M

Anaesthesia, 2010

120 participants

Abstract

Summary We compared the performance of the Intersurgical Solus laryngeal mask airway (LMA) with that of the i-gel in 120 patients of ASA physical status during general anaesthesia with respect to oropharyngeal leak pressure, peak airway pressure, airway manipulation, insertion time, fibreoptic view, ventilatory parameters, and peri-operative complications. After receiving a standardised induction of anaesthesia, either a Solus LMA (60 patients) or an i-gel (60 patients) was inserted. One hundred and fifteen patients completed the study. The leak pressure was significantly higher in the LMA group than the i-gel group (mean (SD) 22.7 (7.7) cmH(2)O vs 19.3 (7.1) cmH(2)O; p = 0.02). A better fibreoptic view of the larynx was obtained in patients in the LMA group (p = 0.02) compared to those in the i-gel group and less airway manipulation was required in the LMA group (p < 0.01). Both devices have good performance with very low peri-operative complications. However, the Solus LMA provides a better oropharyngeal seal, provides a better fibreoptic view, and requires less manipulation to secure the airway than the i-gel.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 120 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free