Literature DB >> 16490088

Randomized controlled trial comparing the laryngeal tube and the laryngeal mask in pediatric patients.

Luciano Bortone1, Pablo M Ingelmo, Gesù De Ninno, Michela Tosi, Laura Caffini, Juna Trenchi, Mario Mergoni, Fabio Martorana.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The laryngeal tube (LT) is a supraglottic ventilatory device used in adults. However, there is limited information about LT use in pediatric patients. This randomized controlled study compares LT with laryngeal mask (LMA) for airway management during spontaneous or assisted ventilation and during fiberoptic laryngoscopy in children.
METHODS: Thirty children under 10-years old, ASA I-II, scheduled for minor general surgery, Mallampati score I-II, fasted and premedicated were included. Patients with upper respiratory infection, craniofacial malformation, intracranial hypertension, emergency surgery were excluded. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients in whom effective spontaneous or assisted ventilation [Vt > or = 4 ml.kg(-1), SpO2 > or = 95% with FiO2 0.4, P(E)CO2 < or = 7.2 kPa (55 mmHg)] was achieved after 3 min of LT or LMA cuff inflation. The secondary endpoint was the proportion of patients in whom fiberoptic laryngoscopy resulted in identification of the vocal cords.
RESULTS: Eleven children with LMA and two children in LT group had adequate spontaneous or assisted ventilation after initial positioning (P < 0.01). After head extension or device repositioning 15 of 15 patients in LMA group had adequate ventilation compared with 11 of 15 patients in LT group (P < 0.05). The vocal cords could be observed with fiberoptic laryngoscopy in 11 LMA group patients compared with no patients in the LT group (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The LT is less effective than the LMA to allow adequate spontaneous or assisted ventilation and for fiberoptic evaluation of the airway in children under 10 years old.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16490088     DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2005.01756.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth        ISSN: 1155-5645            Impact factor:   2.556


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Interdisciplinary consensus statement on alternative airway management with supraglottic airway devices in pediatric emergency medicine: Laryngeal mask is state of the art].

Authors:  J Keil; P Jung; A Schiele; B Urban; A Parsch; B Matsche; C Eich; K Becke; B Landsleitner; S G Russo; M Bernhard; T Nicolai; F Hoffmann
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 2.  [Laryngeal masks. Possibilities and limits].

Authors:  H Hillebrand; J Motsch
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 3.  [Supraglottic airway devices].

Authors:  K Schwarzkopf
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 0.840

4.  [Life-threatening macroglossia following cleft palate palatoplasty].

Authors:  C Neuhäuser; J Welter; C Arendt; L Bindl; B Schmitz
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2010-09-19       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  Randomized comparison of the i-gel™, the LMA Supreme™, and the Laryngeal Tube Suction-D using clinical and fibreoptic assessments in elective patients.

Authors:  Sebastian G Russo; Stephan Cremer; Tamara Galli; Christoph Eich; Anselm Bräuer; Thomas A Crozier; Martin Bauer; Micha Strack
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 2.217

6.  Laryngeal mask airway vs the endotracheal tube in paediatric airway management: A meta-analysis of prospective randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Abhiruchi Patki
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2011-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.