Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries

We compared proseal, supreme, and i-gel supraglottic airway devices in terms of oropharyngeal leak pressures and airway morbidities in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. One hundred and five patients undergoing elective surgery were subjected to general anesthesia after which they were randomly d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sanli Mukadder, Begec Zekine, Kayhan Gulay Erdogan, Ozgul Ulku, Ucar Muharrem, Yologlu Saim, Durmus Mahmut
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2015-01-01
Series:The Scientific World Journal
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/634320
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849307773037182976
author Sanli Mukadder
Begec Zekine
Kayhan Gulay Erdogan
Ozgul Ulku
Ucar Muharrem
Yologlu Saim
Durmus Mahmut
author_facet Sanli Mukadder
Begec Zekine
Kayhan Gulay Erdogan
Ozgul Ulku
Ucar Muharrem
Yologlu Saim
Durmus Mahmut
author_sort Sanli Mukadder
collection DOAJ
description We compared proseal, supreme, and i-gel supraglottic airway devices in terms of oropharyngeal leak pressures and airway morbidities in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. One hundred and five patients undergoing elective surgery were subjected to general anesthesia after which they were randomly distributed into three groups. Although the oropharyngeal leak pressure was lower in the i-gel group initially (mean ± standard deviation; 23.9 ± 2.4, 24.9 ± 2.9, and 20.9 ± 3.5, resp.), it was higher than the proseal group and supreme group at 30 min of surgery after the trendelenburg position (25.0 ± 2.3, 25.0 ± 1.9, and 28.3 ± 2.3, resp.) and at the 60 min of surgery (24.2 ± 2.1, 24.8 ± 2.2, and 29.5 ± 1.1, resp.). The time to apply the supraglottic airway devices was shorter in the i-gel group (12.2 (1.2), 12.9 (1.0), and 6.7 (1.2), resp., P=0.001). There was no difference between the groups in terms of their fiber optic imaging levels. pH was measured at the anterior and posterior surfaces of the pharyngeal region after the supraglottic airway devices were removed; the lowest pH values were 5 in all groups. We concluded that initial oropharyngeal leak pressures obtained by i-gel were lower than proseal and supreme, but increased oropharyngeal leak pressures over time, ease of placement, and lower airway morbidity are favorable for i-gel.
format Article
id doaj-art-285477a85b3d41bca2acffe1a7b4aef5
institution Kabale University
issn 2356-6140
1537-744X
language English
publishDate 2015-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series The Scientific World Journal
spelling doaj-art-285477a85b3d41bca2acffe1a7b4aef52025-08-20T03:54:38ZengWileyThe Scientific World Journal2356-61401537-744X2015-01-01201510.1155/2015/634320634320Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic SurgeriesSanli Mukadder0Begec Zekine1Kayhan Gulay Erdogan2Ozgul Ulku3Ucar Muharrem4Yologlu Saim5Durmus Mahmut6Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Biostatistics, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Inonu University School of Medicine, Malatya, TurkeyWe compared proseal, supreme, and i-gel supraglottic airway devices in terms of oropharyngeal leak pressures and airway morbidities in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. One hundred and five patients undergoing elective surgery were subjected to general anesthesia after which they were randomly distributed into three groups. Although the oropharyngeal leak pressure was lower in the i-gel group initially (mean ± standard deviation; 23.9 ± 2.4, 24.9 ± 2.9, and 20.9 ± 3.5, resp.), it was higher than the proseal group and supreme group at 30 min of surgery after the trendelenburg position (25.0 ± 2.3, 25.0 ± 1.9, and 28.3 ± 2.3, resp.) and at the 60 min of surgery (24.2 ± 2.1, 24.8 ± 2.2, and 29.5 ± 1.1, resp.). The time to apply the supraglottic airway devices was shorter in the i-gel group (12.2 (1.2), 12.9 (1.0), and 6.7 (1.2), resp., P=0.001). There was no difference between the groups in terms of their fiber optic imaging levels. pH was measured at the anterior and posterior surfaces of the pharyngeal region after the supraglottic airway devices were removed; the lowest pH values were 5 in all groups. We concluded that initial oropharyngeal leak pressures obtained by i-gel were lower than proseal and supreme, but increased oropharyngeal leak pressures over time, ease of placement, and lower airway morbidity are favorable for i-gel.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/634320
spellingShingle Sanli Mukadder
Begec Zekine
Kayhan Gulay Erdogan
Ozgul Ulku
Ucar Muharrem
Yologlu Saim
Durmus Mahmut
Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
The Scientific World Journal
title Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
title_full Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
title_fullStr Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
title_short Comparison of the Proseal, Supreme, and I-Gel SAD in Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries
title_sort comparison of the proseal supreme and i gel sad in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/634320
work_keys_str_mv AT sanlimukadder comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT begeczekine comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT kayhangulayerdogan comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT ozgululku comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT ucarmuharrem comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT yologlusaim comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries
AT durmusmahmut comparisonoftheprosealsupremeandigelsadingynecologicallaparoscopicsurgeries