AIM: To compare the I–GEL and Proseal LMA(PLMA) in elective surgeries with regard to  Ease and success rate of insertion,, time of insertion  Airway sealing pressure, Ease of gastric tube placement and  associated complication.

Materials: In a prospective randomized study, 60 adult patients of ASA I–II of either gender between 18 and 60 years presenting for a short surgical procedure under general anesthesia using either  i–gel or PLMA. An experienced anesthesiologist inserted appropriate sized i–gel or PLMA in patients using standard insertion technique and assessed the intraoperative findings of the study regarding time taken for respective device insertion, effective seal, ease of gastric tube insertion and complications were done.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences in demographic and hemodynamic data. Ease of insertion and success rate were comparable no significant difference in both devices (P > 0.05) (Chi–square test). The mean time for insertion was more with PLMA (25.23 + 5.463 sec) than with IGEL (16.80 + 3.336 sec) (P < 0.05). Although the airway sealing pressure was significantly higher with PLMA (28.93 + 2.212 cm of H₂O), the airway sealing pressure of IGEL (26.07 + 3.073 cm of H₂O) was very well within normal limit (Student‘s t test). Ease of gastric tube placement were much easier in IGEL than PLMA with (p=0.031). Incidence of complications were comparable.

CONCLUSION: I–Gel is a supraglottic device with acceptable airway sealing pressure, easier to insert gastric tube and less sore throat incidence. Hence I–Gel can be a good alternative to PLMA.