I-Gel as an intubation conduit: Comparison of three different types of endotracheal tubes.

Abstract

Background and Aims:I-Gel®, a novel SAD has been introduced as a ventilating device but has widely gained popularity as conduit for intubation. Unlike intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA), I-Gel® does not have an endotracheal tube specially designed for it. Hence the aim of this study was to compare the rate of successful intubation via I-Gel® using three different types of endotracheal tubes.Methods:We randomised 75 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II patients, between the age group 18-60 years of either sex undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia into three groups on the basis of endotracheal tube (ETT), used for intubation via I-Gel®: Group P (Polyvinyl chloride ETT), Group I (Intubating laryngeal mask airway ETT), Group F (flexometallic ETT). After following the standard induction protocol, appropriate size I Gel® was inserted in all patients. Thereafter group specific ETT was inserted via I-Gel®. We recorded and compared the time taken for successful intubation, the success rate, number of attempts taken, manoeuvres used, and complications among three different types of ETT. Quantitative variables were compared using Kruskal Wallis test and the qualitative variables were compared using Chi-square test.Results:The time taken for successful intubation was least in group P (10.51 ± 3.82 seconds). Group P also had the highest first attempt (68%) and overall rate of successful intubation (88%).Conclusion:PVC ETT had highest first attempt success rate and required minimum time for endotracheal intubation via I-Gel® when compared to ILMA ETT and Flexible ETT.