Face Mask vs Laryngeal Mask Airway in Newborn Resuscitation

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-30
2015 ◽  
Vol 167 (2) ◽  
pp. 286-291.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniele Trevisanuto ◽  
Francesco Cavallin ◽  
Loi Ngoc Nguyen ◽  
Tien Viet Nguyen ◽  
Linh Dieu Tran ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Fulvio Nisi ◽  
Gaetano Cicchitto ◽  
Francesco Puma ◽  
Vito Aldo Peduto ◽  
Antonio Galzerano

1998 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifford A. Schmiesing ◽  
John G. Brock-Utne

The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is an airway management device that has become an accepted part of anesthetic practice in both pediatric and adults surgical patients. It is inserted without the use of a laryngoscope or muscle relaxants into the hypopharynx forming a low pressure seal around the glottis. The LMA provides a better airway than a face mask with or without an oral airway. Insertion techniques are quickly learned and are described in this review. Since the LMA forms a less secure seal than an endotracheal tube (ETT), several important limitations and contraindications exist. This includes patients at high risk for regurgitation of gastric contents into the lungs causing pulmonary aspiration and patients requiring high ventilatory pressures or prolonged ventilation. These contraindications have limited its introduction and utilization in the intensive care unit (ICU). The LMA is a helpful tool in the management of both the expected and unexpected difficult airway, where it may serve both as an emergency airway and as a conduit to intubation of the trachea with an ETT over a fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB) or gum elastic bougie. A lifesaving airway has been provided by the LMA where no other means of achieving ventilation were possible in patients, including neonates, trauma victims, woman undergoing cesarean section, and in the setting of cardiac arrest. There are very few reported uses of the LMA in the ICU. We believe that familiarity with the LMA's design, use, and limitations by critical care practitioners will increase its use in emergency airway management and in the ICU. The LMA may prove to be the first of a new generation of airway devices placed into the hypopharynx to provide an alternative to the endotracheal tube and mask airway.


2017 ◽  
Vol 103 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas J Pejovic ◽  
Daniele Trevisanuto ◽  
Clare Lubulwa ◽  
Susanna Myrnerts Höök ◽  
Francesco Cavallin ◽  
...  

ObjectiveMortality rates from birth asphyxia in low-income countries remain high. Face mask ventilation (FMV) performed by midwives is the usual method of resuscitating neonates in such settings but may not always be effective. The i-gel is a cuffless laryngeal mask airway (LMA) that could enhance neonatal resuscitation performance. We aimed to compare LMA and face mask (FM) during neonatal resuscitation in a low-resource setting.SettingMulago National Referral Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.DesignThis prospective randomised clinical trial was conducted at the labour ward operating theatre. After a brief training on LMA and FM use, infants with a birth weight >2000 g and requiring positive pressure ventilation at birth were randomised to resuscitation by LMA or FM. Resuscitations were video recorded.Main outcome measuresTime to spontaneous breathing.ResultsForty-nine (24 in the LMA and 25 in the FM arm) out of 50 enrolled patients were analysed. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two arms. Time to spontaneous breathing was shorter in LMA arm than in FM arm (mean 153 s (SD±59) vs 216 s (SD±92)). All resuscitations were effective in LMA arm, whereas 11 patients receiving FM were converted to LMA because response to FMV was unsatisfactory. There were no adverse effects.ConclusionA cuffless LMA was more effective than FM in reducing time to spontaneous breathing. LMA seems to be safe and effective in clinical practice after a short training programme. Its potential benefits on long-term outcomes need to be assessed in a larger trial.Clinical trial registryThis trial was registered in https://clinicaltrials.gov, with registration number NCT02042118.


1996 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 536-543. ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Muzi ◽  
B.J. Robinson ◽  
T.J. Ebert ◽  
T.J. O'Brien

Background The speed, quality, and cost of mask induction of anesthesia and laryngeal mask airway insertion or tracheal intubation were studied in young non-premedicated volunteers given high inspired concentrations of sevoflurane (6 to 7%). Methods Twenty healthy persons who were 19 to 32 years old participated three times, received 6 l/min fresh gas flow, and were randomized to receive 6 to 7% sevoflurane in 66% nitrous oxide/28% oxygen by face mask until tracheal intubation (treatment 1) or until laryngeal mask airway insertion (treatment 3), or 6 to 7% sevoflurane without nitrous oxide to tracheal intubation (treatment 2). Participants exhaled to residual volume and took three vital capacity breaths of the gas mixture; thereafter ventilation was manually assisted. The time of exposure to the inhaled gas was varied for consecutive participants. It was either increased or decreased by 30-sec increments based on the failure or success of the preceding volunteer's response to laryngoscopy and intubation after a preselected exposure time. Failure was defined as poor jaw relaxation, coughing or bucking, or inadequate vocal cord relaxation. Results Loss of the lid-lash reflex in unpremedicated young volunteers was achieved in 1 min and did not differ among groups. Average time (and 95% confidence interval) for acceptable conditions for LMA insertion was achieved in 1.7 (0.7 to 2.7) min, and all participants had an immediate return of spontaneous ventilation. The time for acceptable tracheal intubating conditions after manual hyperventilation by mask was 4.7 (3.7 to 5.7) min and 6.4 (5.1 to 7.7) min in treatments 1 and 2, respectively. There were no cases of increased secretions or laryngospasm. The incidence of breath holding and expiratory stridor ("crowing") was 7.5% and 25%, respectively, during treatment 1 and 15% and 40%, respectively, during treatment 2. Conclusions The induction of anesthesia to loss of lid reflex in young non-premedicated adults approaches the speed of intravenous induction techniques. No untoward airway responses were noted during mask induction of anesthesia with a three-breath technique. In response to intubation, no adverse airway responses, including jaw tightness, laryngospasm, and excessive coughing or bucking, occurred in participants whose duration of mask administration of sevoflurane met the appropriate times (as determined in this study).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document