Objectives and Background: This study compares the insertion times of the I-GEL and ILMA supraglottic airway devices and assesses their efficacy as conduits for blind endotracheal intubation and emergency ventilatory devices in difficult intubating situations.
Material and Methods: This study was a prospective comparative one. The Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Karimnagar, Telangana, India, hosted the study from January 2015 to August 2015. 40 patients were employed in this investigation. 40 patients who were having elective surgery under general anaesthesia participated in this study, which was carried out with institutional ethical committee approval. All patients provided their written, voluntarily informed consent.
Results: Chi-square and fisher's exact tests were used to compare demographics, ease of insertion, number of attempts and duration for SAD insertion, number of attempts and duration for ETT insertion, failure, and postoperative sore throat and dysphasia.
Conclusion: Some have argued that ILMA is preferable to I-GEL as a conduit for blind endotracheal intubation and as a device for emergency rescue ventilation.