A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

<h4>Background and objective</h4>Conflicting results were found between the I-gel™ and the LMA-Supreme™ during anesthesia, so we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effectiveness and safety of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-Supreme™during anesthesia.&l...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Xiaoguang Chen, Jinghua Jiao, Xuefeng Cong, Lei Liu, Xiaomei Wu
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/68213132b7ff499483b2155bffedf8af
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:68213132b7ff499483b2155bffedf8af
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:68213132b7ff499483b2155bffedf8af2021-11-18T09:00:04ZA comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0071910https://doaj.org/article/68213132b7ff499483b2155bffedf8af2013-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/23951266/pdf/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background and objective</h4>Conflicting results were found between the I-gel™ and the LMA-Supreme™ during anesthesia, so we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effectiveness and safety of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-Supreme™during anesthesia.<h4>Methods</h4>A comprehensive search was conducted using Pubmed, EMbase, ISI Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, China Journal Full-text Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Scientific Journals Full-text Database, CMA Digital Periodicals, and Google scholar to find RCTs that compare the LMA-S™ with the i-gel™during anesthesia. Two reviewers independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed the methodological qualities and evidence levels. Data were analyzed by RevMan 5.0 and comprehensive meta-analysis software.<h4>Results</h4>Ten RCTs were included. There were no significant differences in oropharyngeal leak pressures (mean difference [MD] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.10 2.53), device placement time (MD -1.3, 95%CI -4.07 1.44), first attempt insertion success (risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% CI 0.9 1.14), grade 3 and 4 fiberoptic view (RR 0.89, 95%CI 0.65 1.21), and blood on removal (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.32 1.22) between the i-gel™ and the LMA-Supreme™, respectively. However, the LMA-Supreme™was associated with easier gastric tube insertion (RR 1.17, 95%CI 1.07 1.29), and more sore throat (RR 2.56, 95%CI 1.60 4.12) than the i-gel™ group.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The LMA-Supreme™ and i-gel™ were similarly successful and rapidly inserted. However, the LMA-Supreme™ was shown to be easier for gastric tube insertion and associated with more sore throat compared with the i-gel™.Xiaoguang ChenJinghua JiaoXuefeng CongLei LiuXiaomei WuPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 8, Iss 8, p e71910 (2013)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Xiaoguang Chen Jinghua Jiao Xuefeng Cong Lei Liu Xiaomei Wu A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
description	<h4>Background and objective</h4>Conflicting results were found between the I-gel™ and the LMA-Supreme™ during anesthesia, so we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effectiveness and safety of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-Supreme™during anesthesia.<h4>Methods</h4>A comprehensive search was conducted using Pubmed, EMbase, ISI Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, China Journal Full-text Database, Chinese Biomedical Database, Chinese Scientific Journals Full-text Database, CMA Digital Periodicals, and Google scholar to find RCTs that compare the LMA-S™ with the i-gel™during anesthesia. Two reviewers independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed the methodological qualities and evidence levels. Data were analyzed by RevMan 5.0 and comprehensive meta-analysis software.<h4>Results</h4>Ten RCTs were included. There were no significant differences in oropharyngeal leak pressures (mean difference [MD] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.10 2.53), device placement time (MD -1.3, 95%CI -4.07 1.44), first attempt insertion success (risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% CI 0.9 1.14), grade 3 and 4 fiberoptic view (RR 0.89, 95%CI 0.65 1.21), and blood on removal (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.32 1.22) between the i-gel™ and the LMA-Supreme™, respectively. However, the LMA-Supreme™was associated with easier gastric tube insertion (RR 1.17, 95%CI 1.07 1.29), and more sore throat (RR 2.56, 95%CI 1.60 4.12) than the i-gel™ group.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The LMA-Supreme™ and i-gel™ were similarly successful and rapidly inserted. However, the LMA-Supreme™ was shown to be easier for gastric tube insertion and associated with more sore throat compared with the i-gel™.
format	article
author	Xiaoguang Chen Jinghua Jiao Xuefeng Cong Lei Liu Xiaomei Wu
author_facet	Xiaoguang Chen Jinghua Jiao Xuefeng Cong Lei Liu Xiaomei Wu
author_sort	Xiaoguang Chen
title	A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
title_short	A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
title_full	A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
title_fullStr	A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
title_full_unstemmed	A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
title_sort	comparison of the performance of the i-gel™ vs. the lma-s™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2013
url	https://doaj.org/article/68213132b7ff499483b2155bffedf8af
work_keys_str_mv	AT xiaoguangchen acomparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT jinghuajiao acomparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xuefengcong acomparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT leiliu acomparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xiaomeiwu acomparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xiaoguangchen comparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT jinghuajiao comparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xuefengcong comparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT leiliu comparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xiaomeiwu comparisonoftheperformanceoftheigelvsthelmasduringanesthesiaametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
_version_	1718421024512409600

A comparison of the performance of the I-gel™ vs. the LMA-S™during anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ejemplares similares