Trial reportAnnals of African medicine2026
Randomized Assessment of Airway Seal Pressure and Insertion Dynamics: I-gel versus Laryngeal Mask Airway Protector in Adult Difficult Airway Simulation in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgeries.
Trial report in Annals of African medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSupraglottic airway devices (SGAs) have emerged as effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for airway management, especially in difficult airway scenarios. This study compared the ease of insertion, insertion time, and oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP) between the i-gel and the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) protector in adult patients with simulated difficult airway undergoing elective laparoscopic procedures. METHODOLOGY: Sixty adult patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II), aged 18-60 years, scheduled for elective laparoscopic surgeries under general anesthesia, were randomized into two groups: Group I (i-gel) and Group P (LMA Protector). SAD was inserted in a simulated airway scenario made more difficult by using a cervical collar to limit mouth opening and neck movement. Insertion time and ease of insertion were recorded. OLP was measured 5 min after device insertion and pneumoperitoneum. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
resultsI-gel showed shorter insertion time (18.16 ± 3.62 vs. 29.65 ± 7.39 s; P < 0.0001) and greater ease of insertion ( P < 0.0001). LMA protector had significantly higher OLP than i-gel, both 5 min postinsertion (37.5 ± 2.86 vs. 27.33 ± 4.69 cm H 2 O; P < 0.0001) and after pneumoperitoneum (34.83 ± 3.34 vs. 22.83 ± 4.49 cm H 2 O; P < 0.0001).
conclusionWhile the i-gel is associated with quicker and easier insertion, the LMA protector offers superior airway sealing pressures. Both devices are effective, but the choice should be tailored to procedural demands and clinician preference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.