I-Gel as an Alternative to Endotracheal Tube in Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgeries: A Comparative Study

Sara  Farzadi; Reyhaneh  Shahrokhi Rad; Kian  Khanjani; Hiva  Varshavian; Soheil  Soltanipour; Gelareh  Biazar; Samaneh  Ghazanfar Tehran

doi:10.18502/jimc.v8i3.18803

Sara Farzadi Reproductive Health Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Al-Zahra Hospital, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Reyhaneh Shahrokhi Rad Anesthesiology Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Al-Zahra Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Kian Khanjani Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Hiva Varshavian Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Soheil Soltanipour Department of Community Medicine, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Gelareh Biazar Anesthesiology Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Al-Zahra Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Samaneh Ghazanfar Tehran Anesthesiology Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Al-Zahra Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/jimc.v8i3.18803

Keywords: Arterial pressure, Hemodynamics, Intratracheal intubation, Laparoscopy, Laryngoscopy, Patient satisfaction, Respiration

Abstract

Background: Endotracheal Tube (ETT) intubation with rigid laryngoscopy evokes significant hemodynamic changes. Therefore, it is crucial to find an alternative for specific conditions like an irritative airway. For this purpose, the safety and efficacy of I-gel in gynecologic laparoscopic surgeries was examined.

Methods: This clinical trial was conducted at Al-Zahra Hospital affiliated with Guilan University of Medical Sciences (GUMS) from July 2023 to May 2024. Eligible women, aged 18 to 55 years, ASA class I and II, were randomly divided into two groups of I-gel and ETT. Hemodynamic status, ease of device placement, ventilation parameters and complications were compared between the two groups.

Results: Finally, the data from 92 women were analyzed. In terms of patients’ demographic data (p>0.05), surgery duration (p=0.730), surgeons’ satisfaction (p=0.655), airway pressure (p=0.804), leak volume (p=0.430), ETCO₂values (p=0.957) and side effects (p< 0.05), the results showed no significant difference between the two groups. Easy insertion was observed among 80.4% of the patients in I-gel group and in 93.5% in ETT group (p=0.063). Regarding the hemodynamic parameters, including Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) values, the difference was not significant in any of the measurement times (p< 0.05).

Conclusion: I-gel could be suggested as a safe alternative to ETT in special conditions in laparoscopic surgeries.