Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T00:58:41.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simple method to determine the size of the laryngeal mask airway in children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2005

L. Gallart ,
A. Mases ,
J. Martinez ,
A. Montes ,
S. Fernandez-Galinski  and
M. M. Puig
L. Gallart
Affiliation:
Hospital Universitari del Mar (IMAS), Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, Spain
A. Mases
Affiliation:
Hospital Universitari del Mar (IMAS), Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, Spain
J. Martinez
Affiliation:
Hospital Mútua de Terrassa, Catalonia, Spain
A. Montes
Affiliation:
Hospital Universitari del Mar (IMAS), Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, Spain
S. Fernandez-Galinski
Affiliation:
Hospital Universitari del Mar (IMAS), Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, Spain
M. M. Puig
Affiliation:
Hospital Universitari del Mar (IMAS), Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department of Anaesthesiology, Barcelona, Spain
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: The size of the laryngeal mask airway in children is determined by the patient's weight. However, in some instances an alternative method may be wanted. The aim was to search for a new method that would be easy to perform at the bedside.

Methods: The size of the laryngeal mask airway was determined in 183 children by choosing the laryngeal mask that best matched the combined widths of the patient's index, middle and ring fingers. The results were compared with the standard method recommended by the manufacturer's weight-related guidelines. The patients were classified in different groups depending on the laryngeal mask airway sizes determined by both methods. A kappa coefficient evaluated the agreement between both techniques.

Results: The kappa coefficient was 0.81, showing an ‘excellent agreement’ between both methods. The size was the same for both methods in 142 children (78%). The disagreement between both techniques was only of one size in the remaining 41 patients (22%). In such patients, the weight was a borderline value that would indicate a change in the size of the laryngeal mask airway using the classic method.

Conclusions: This new approach is of valid and practical use in children, particularly as an alternative in those situations where the patient's weight is unknown, such as in emergency situations or in those borderline instances where an alternative measurement would be useful.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA, GENERALINTUBATION, INTRATRACHEAL, laryngeal masksPAEDIATRICS
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 20 , Issue 7 , September 2003 , pp. 570 - 574
Copyright
© 2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kokkinis K. The use of the laryngeal mask airway in CPR. Resuscitation 1994; 27: 9–12.Google Scholar
Mawer RJ. Equipment for paediatric resuscitation (see comments). Anaesthesia 1995; 50: 87–88.Google Scholar
Paterson SJ, Byrne PJ, Molesky MG, Seal RF, Finucane BT. Neonatal resuscitation using the laryngeal mask airway (see comments). Anesthesiology 1994; 80: 1248–1253; discussion 27A.Google Scholar
Thomas EO. Neonatal resuscitation and the laryngeal mask airway. Anaesthesia 1995; 50: 569–570.Google Scholar
Eckel HE, Sittel C. Morphometry of the larynx in horizontal sections. Am J Otolaryngol 1995; 16: 40–48.Google Scholar
Seigel DG, Podgor MJ, Remaley NA. Acceptable values of Kappa for comparison of two groups. Am J Epidemiol 1992; 135: 571–578.Google Scholar
Benumof JL. Laryngeal mask airway and the ASA difficult airway algorithm. Anesthesiology 1996; 84: 686–699.Google Scholar
Benumof JL. Laryngeal mask airway. Indications and contraindications. Anesthesiology 1992; 77: 843–846.Google Scholar
Johnston DF, Wrigley SR, Robb PJ, Jones HE. The laryngeal mask airway in paediatric anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1990; 45: 924–927.Google Scholar
Greig A, Ryan J, Glucksman E. How good are doctors at estimating children's weight? J Accid Emerg Med 1997; 14: 101–103.Google Scholar
Maestre JM, Priede H, Fernandez M, Naharro JJ, Ochoa MA. Protocolo de actuacion en una intubacion fallida imprevista. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 1998; 44: 167–169.Google Scholar
Brain AIJ. The development of the laryngeal mask – a brief history of the invention, early clinical studies and experimental work from which the laryngeal mask evolved. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1991; 8 (Suppl 4): 5–17.Google Scholar
Chodoff P, Helrich M. Factors affecting pediatric endotracheal tube size: a statistical analysis. Anesthesiology 1967; 28: 779.Google Scholar
Fisher DM. Anesthesia equipment for pediatrics. In: Gregory GA, ed. Pediatric Anesthesia, 2nd edn. New York, USA: Churchill Livingstone, 1989: 437–475.
Gregory GA. Induction of anesthesia. In: Gregory GA, ed. Pediatric Anesthesia, 2nd edn. New York, USA: Churchill Livingstone, 1989: 539–560.
Berry AM, Brimacombe JR, McManus KF, Goldblatt M. An evaluation of the factors influencing selection of the optimal size of laryngeal mask airway in normal adults. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 565–570.Google Scholar
Wakeling HG, Butler PJ, Baxter PJC. The laryngeal mask airway: a comparison between two insertion techniques. Anesth Analg 1997; 85: 687–690.Google Scholar
Voyagis GS, Batzioulis PG, Secha-Doussaitou PN. Selection of the proper size of laryngeal mask airway in adults. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 663–664.Google Scholar
Goodman FJ, Eisenmann UB, Dumas SD. Correlation of pharyngeal size to body mass index in the adult. Anesth Analg 1997; 84 (Suppl): S584.Google Scholar
Brimacombe JR, Berry AM, Campbell RC, Verghese C. Selection of the proper size of laryngeal mask airway in adults. In response. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 664.Google Scholar
Verghese C, Brimacombe JR. Survey of laryngeal mask airway usage in 11,910 patients: safety and efficacy for conventional and nonconventional usage. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 129–133.Google Scholar