J Keil1, P Jung2, A Schiele3, B Urban1, A Parsch3, B Matsche3, C Eich2,4, K Becke4, B Landsleitner4, S G Russo4, M Bernhard5, T Nicolai6, F Hoffmann7,8. 1. Institut für Notfallmedizin und Medizinmanagement (INM), Klinikum der Universität München, Lindwurmstr. 4, 80337, München, Deutschland. 2. Sektion "Pädiatrische Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin", Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI), Berlin, Deutschland. 3. Ärztlicher Leiter Rettungsdienst Bayern (ÄLRD Bayern), Bayern, Deutschland. 4. Wissenschaftlicher Arbeitskreis Kinderanästhesie (WAKKA), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin (DGAI), Nürnberg, Deutschland. 5. Wissenschaftlicher Arbeitskreis "Notfallmedizin", Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin (DGAI), Nürnberg, Deutschland. 6. Gesellschaft für Neonatologie und Pädiatrische Intensivmedizin (GNPI), Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland. 7. Institut für Notfallmedizin und Medizinmanagement (INM), Klinikum der Universität München, Lindwurmstr. 4, 80337, München, Deutschland. florian.hoffmann@med.uni-muenchen.de. 8. Sektion "Pädiatrische Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin", Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin (DIVI), Berlin, Deutschland. florian.hoffmann@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Airway management with supraglottic airway devices (SGA) in life-threatening emergencies involving children is becoming increasingly more important. The laryngeal mask (LM) and the laryngeal tube (LT) are devices commonly used for this purpose. This article presents a literature review and consensus statement by various societies on the use of SGA in pediatric emergency medicine. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Literature search in the database PubMed and classification of studies according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence. RESULTS: The evidence for successful application of the various types of LM is significantly higher than for LT application. Reports of smaller series of successful applications of LT are currently limited to selected research groups and centers. Insufficient evidence currently exists for the successful application of the LT especially for children below 10 kg body weight and, therefore, its routine use cannot currently be recommended. SGAs used for emergencies should have a possibility for gastric drainage. DISCUSSION: Considering the scientific data and the large clinical experience with the LM in medical routine and emergency situations in children, currently only the LM can be recommended for alternative (i.e. non-intubation) airway management in children. If alternative airway management is part of a local emergency strategy, the LM should be provided in all pediatric sizes (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4 and 5) for prehospital and in-hospital emergency use and all users should be regularly trained in its application.
BACKGROUND: Airway management with supraglottic airway devices (SGA) in life-threatening emergencies involving children is becoming increasingly more important. The laryngeal mask (LM) and the laryngeal tube (LT) are devices commonly used for this purpose. This article presents a literature review and consensus statement by various societies on the use of SGA in pediatric emergency medicine. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Literature search in the database PubMed and classification of studies according to the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence. RESULTS: The evidence for successful application of the various types of LM is significantly higher than for LT application. Reports of smaller series of successful applications of LT are currently limited to selected research groups and centers. Insufficient evidence currently exists for the successful application of the LT especially for children below 10 kg body weight and, therefore, its routine use cannot currently be recommended. SGAs used for emergencies should have a possibility for gastric drainage. DISCUSSION: Considering the scientific data and the large clinical experience with the LM in medical routine and emergency situations in children, currently only the LM can be recommended for alternative (i.e. non-intubation) airway management in children. If alternative airway management is part of a local emergency strategy, the LM should be provided in all pediatric sizes (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4 and 5) for prehospital and in-hospital emergency use and all users should be regularly trained in its application.
Authors: Ian K Maconochie; Robert Bingham; Christoph Eich; Jesús López-Herce; Antonio Rodríguez-Núñez; Thomas Rajka; Patrick Van de Voorde; David A Zideman; Dominique Biarent Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Claire Martinon; Caroline Duracher; Stéphane Blanot; Sylvie Escolano; Maria De Agostini; Anne Catherine Périé-Vintras; Gilles Orliaguet; Pierre A Carli; Philippe G Meyer Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Richard Schalk; Florian H Seeger; Haitham Mutlak; Uwe Schweigkofler; Kai Zacharowski; Norman Peter; Christian Byhahn Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Min-Soo Kim; Jae Hoon Lee; Sang Won Han; Young Jae Im; Hyo Jong Kang; Jeong-Rim Lee Journal: Paediatr Anaesth Date: 2015-01-06 Impact factor: 2.556