Comparison of guided insertion of the LMA ProSeal vs the i-gel

Abstract

In a randomised, non-crossover study, we tested the hypothesis that the ease of insertion using a duodenal tube guided insertion technique and the oropharyngeal leak pressure differ between the LMA ProSeal™ and the i-gel™ in non-paralysed, anesthetised female subjects. One hundred and fifty-two females aged 19–70 years were studied. Insertion success rate, insertion time and oropharyngeal leak pressure were measured. First attempt and overall insertion success were similar (LMA ProSeal, 75/76 (99%) and 76/76 (100%); i-gel 73/75 (97%) and 75 (100%), respectively). Mean (SD) insertion times were similar (LMA ProSeal, 40 (16) s; i-gel 43 (21) s). Mean oropharyngeal leak pressure was 7 cmH2O higher with the LMA ProSeal (p < 0.0001). Insertion of the LMA ProSeal and i-gel is similarly easy using a duodenal tube guided technique, but the LMA ProSeal forms a more effective seal for ventilation.