We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Randomized, controlled trial comparing laryngeal mask versus endotracheal intubation during neonatal resuscitation---a secondary publication.
BMC Pediatrics 2016 January 26
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to study the feasibility, efficacy and safety of using laryngeal mask (LM) ventilation compared with endotracheal intubation (ETI) during neonatal resuscitation.
METHODS: Neonates with a heart rate below 60 beats per minute despite 30 s of face mask ventilation were assigned quasi-randomly (odd/even birth date) to LM (n = 36) or ETI (n = 32) ventilation. Differences in first attempt insertion success, insertion time, Apgar score, resuscitation outcome, and adverse effects were compared.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in first attempt at successful insertion (LM, 94.4 % vs. ETI, 90.6 %), insertion time (LM, 7.58 ± 1.16 s vs. ETI, 7.89 ± 1.52 s), Apgar score at 1 and 5 min, response time, ventilation time, successful resuscitation (LM, 86.1 % vs. ETI, 96.9 %), and adverse events (LM, n =3 vs. ETI, n =4) between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laryngeal mask ventilation is an effective alternative to endotracheal intubation during resuscitation of depressed newborns who do not respond to face-mask ventilation. During an emergency, laryngeal mask ventilation may be a preferred technique for medical staff who are unable to acquire or maintain endotracheal intubation skills.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ChiCTR-IOQ-15006488. Registered on 2 June 2015.
METHODS: Neonates with a heart rate below 60 beats per minute despite 30 s of face mask ventilation were assigned quasi-randomly (odd/even birth date) to LM (n = 36) or ETI (n = 32) ventilation. Differences in first attempt insertion success, insertion time, Apgar score, resuscitation outcome, and adverse effects were compared.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in first attempt at successful insertion (LM, 94.4 % vs. ETI, 90.6 %), insertion time (LM, 7.58 ± 1.16 s vs. ETI, 7.89 ± 1.52 s), Apgar score at 1 and 5 min, response time, ventilation time, successful resuscitation (LM, 86.1 % vs. ETI, 96.9 %), and adverse events (LM, n =3 vs. ETI, n =4) between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laryngeal mask ventilation is an effective alternative to endotracheal intubation during resuscitation of depressed newborns who do not respond to face-mask ventilation. During an emergency, laryngeal mask ventilation may be a preferred technique for medical staff who are unable to acquire or maintain endotracheal intubation skills.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ChiCTR-IOQ-15006488. Registered on 2 June 2015.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app