title: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the i-gel® vs laryngeal mask airway in children.
abstract: We systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials of the i-gel® vs different types of laryngeal mask airway in children. We included nine studies. There was no evidence for differences in: rate of insertion at first attempt; insertion time; ease of insertion; or gastric tube insertion. The mean (95% CI) oropharyngeal leak pressure was 3.29 (2.25-4.34) cmH2 O higher with the i-gel, p < 0.00001. The relative rate (95% CI) of a good fibreoptic view through the i-gel was 1.10 (1.01-1.19), p = 0.02. There were no significant differences in the rates of complications, except for blood on the airway, relative rate with the i-gel 0.46 (0.23-0.91), p = 0.02. We concluded that the clinical performance of the i-gel and LMA was similar, except for three outcomes that favoured the i-gel.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
authors.forename: G J
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: Choi
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Kang
authors.forename: C W
authors.initials: CW
authors.lastname: Baek
authors.forename: Y H
authors.initials: YH
authors.lastname: Jung
authors.forename: Y C
authors.initials: YC
authors.lastname: Woo
authors.forename: Y J
authors.initials: YJ
authors.lastname: Cha
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D004209:Disposable Equipment; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D007442:Intubation, Intratracheal / Q000295:instrumentation; D017214:Laryngeal Masks