COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LMA CLASSIC AND I GEL IN PATIENTS POSTED FOR ELECTIVE SURGERIES UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHESIA AT A TERTIARY HOSPITAL

Abstract

Background: Anaesthesia is safely administered by an effective airway management. Supra
Glottic Airway devices are safe alternatives to Endotracheal Intubation, as they do not require
Laryngoscopy and hence hemodynamic response can be avoided. Present study was aimed to
compare LMA Classic versus I GEL in patients posted for elective surgeries under general
anaesthesia at a tertiary hospital. Material and Methods: Present study was single center,
prospective, comparative study, conducted patients of both sex, aged between 15 to 50 years,
elective surgical procedures under general anaesthesia, Mallampati grade I and II, ASA grade
I and II, duration of surgery less than 1 hr., 100 patients divided into two groups randomly
groups with 50 patients in each group . Results: There was no significant difference in the
mean age, gender & body weight of the patients between Group 1 and Group 2. The
difference in ease of insertion was not statistically significant between the two
groups(p=0.274). The difference in number of attempts at insertion was not statistically
significant between the two groups (p= 0.445). The mean duration of insertion of c-LMA in
group 1 patients and I-gel in group 2 patients were 23.44 ± 6.54080 and 17.32 ± 3.08015
seconds respectively and was statistically significant. (p=0.0001). Lip injury was noted in 2
patients in group 1 (c-LMA) and in 3 patients in group 2 (I-gel). 1 case each in c-LMA and Igel group had blood stain on the device on removal. 4 patients in c LMA group and 2 patients
in I-gel group developed transient sore throat postoperatively. However, the incidence was
not statistically significant. Conclusion: Time taken for insertion was significantly less in Igel compared to c-LMA. There was no significant difference in ease of insertion,
hemodynamic parameters and adverse effects between I-gel and c-LMA.