Comparison of I-gelTM and LMA-SupremeTM With Respect To Ease Of Insertion, Sealing Airway Pressure And Postoperative Throat Complaints

Background: Many types of supraglottic airway devices are now available for clinical use. To ensure patient safety, it is important that their advantages and limitations are studied. Objectives: This study compared the ease of insertion, sealing airway pressure and incidence of postoperative throat complaints between the single-use supraglottic airway devices I-gelTM and laryngeal mask airway (LMA)-SupremeTM. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective randomised double-blinded study comparing I-gelTM and (LMA)-SupremeTM. One hundred and twenty ASA I or II non-paralysed patients were randomly allocated to receive either device and assessed for ease of insertion, the sealing airway pressure and the incidence of postoperative throat complaints. Results: The success rate using I-gelTM and LMA-SupremeTM were comparable but the insertion time was significantly shorter with I-gelTM (14 seconds vs 16 seconds, p = 0.001). The sealing airway pressure was better with LMA-SupremeTM (35 cmH2O vs 30 cmH2O, p = 0.001). The incidence of sore throat and throat dryness was significantly lower in the I-gelTM group as compared with the LMA-SupremeTM group at one hour, 12 hours and 24 hours following anaesthesia. There was no significant difference in the incidence of hoarseness and cough between the two groups at all time intervals. Conclusion: The I-gelTM and the LMA-SupremeTM were comparable in their successful rates of insertion. The I-gelTM had a significantly shorter insertion time and fewer throat complaints, but the LMA-SupremeTM maintained a better sealing airway pressure.