Objective: To determine the first time and overall success rate of two devices (the i-gel® and the LMA-U).

Material and Method: In a prospective, randomized, cross-over study, the performance of the single use i-gel® and disposable LMA-U were compared. Twenty eight patients undergoing general anesthesia from October 2010 and March 2011 were included, each group of 14 patients. The devices were compared with regard to number and duration of insertion attempts, blood pressure, and heart rate.

Results: The i-gel® and LMA-U were successfully inserted at the first attempt in 89.3% and 67.9% of patients, respectively, but no statistically significant. The overall success rate after two attempts and resizing was 92.9% for i-gel® and 85.7% for LMA-U, but also with no statistical significance. The mean insertion time between the two devices was 17.62 sec for i-gel® and 29.71 sec for LMA-U (p-value=0.001)

Conclusion: We found no significant difference of the first-time and overall success rate between the i-gel® and the LMA-U. The insertion time for the i-gel was significantly shorter. We conclude that the i-gel® provides a reasonable alternative to the LMA-U in patients during general anesthesia.