Logo image
Back
A Comparison of Air-Q and I-Gel in Terms of Insertion Conditions and as Intubating Aids for Elective Surgeries under General Anaesthesia
Journal article   Open access

A Comparison of Air-Q and I-Gel in Terms of Insertion Conditions and as Intubating Aids for Elective Surgeries under General Anaesthesia

Babita Ramdev, Heena Goyal, Dinesh Kumar Sharma and Archit Sharma
Journal of evolution of medical and dental sciences, Vol.11(13), pp.918-923
12/31/2022
DOI: 10.14260/jemds.v11i13.291
url
https://doi.org/10.14260/jemds.v11i13.291View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND Supraglottic airway devices (SAD) like air Q and I-Gel are widely used in place of tracheal intubation for general anaesthesia. The present study was undertaken to compare the insertion conditions of these two supraglottic airway devices and as conduits for endotracheal tube (ETT) insertion in adult patients undergoing elective surgeries. METHODS 100 patients belonging to American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade 1 and 2 between 18 to 70 years were randomly divided into 2 groups of 50 each. In group A, Air-Q was used and in group B, I-gel. The following parameters were compared while inserting SAD and endotracheal tube (ETT): number of insertion attempts, insertion time, ease of insertion, intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS Insertion in first attempt was 90 % in air- Q and 72 % in I-gel. The mean time of insertion for air-Q was 7.28  1.46 seconds which  was shorter as compared to I-gel which was 8.46  2.18 seconds (p = 0.002). Air Q was easy to insert in 93 % cases and I-Gel in 52 % cases. ETT insertion through Air-Q was easy when compared to I-Gel .Complications occurred in some patients in both the groups. CONCLUSIONS We concluded that Air-Q has better efficacy than I-gel in terms of insertion conditions and as a conduit for endotracheal intubation.

Details

Metrics

19 Record Views
Logo image