Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://bjan-sba.org/journal/rba/article/doi/10.1016/j.bjane.2020.12.014
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Clinical Research

The place of ultrasonography in confirming the position of the laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients “an observational study”

Sule Arican, Sevgi Pekcan, Gulcin Hacibeyoglu, Merve Yusifov, Sait Yuce, Sema Tuncer Uzun

Downloads: 1
Views: 72

Abstract

Background and objectives
Laryngeal mask airways are increasingly used as supraglottic devices during general anesthesia. Ultrasonography can provide a dynamic image simultaneous to placing the supraglottic airway device. In the current study, the incidence of suboptimal laryngeal mask airway position and replacement in children was evaluated using simultaneous ultrasonographic imaging.

Methods
A prospective observational study was conducted on 82 patients aged 3–15 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II. Patients under general anesthesia and with airway provided by a laryngeal mask airway were included. The position of the laryngeal mask airway was evaluated by ultrasonography on two planes. According to our scoring system, Grade I and Grade II were determined to indicate acceptable placement, while Grade III was determined to indicate unacceptable placement. Suboptimal laryngeal mask airway placement rates and the requirement of replacement were determined. Laryngeal mask airway placement optimized by ultrasonography was evaluated with both leak tests and a fiberoptic laryngoscope.

Results
The average age of the patients was 6.27 ± 4.66 years. After evaluation with ultrasonography, 65 (79.3%) of the laryngeal mask airways were found to be optimally positioned, while the position of 13 (15.9%) had to be corrected, and 4 (4.9%) had to be replaced. There was a moderate positive correlation between the ultrasonographic evaluation and leak test evaluation (p <  0.001; r = 0.628). Relocation of the laryngeal mask airway was determined to be an independent risk factor affecting the development of complications (OR = 2.961; p =  0.046; 95% Cl 2.850–30.745).

Conclusion
The use of ultrasonography to verify and relocate laryngeal mask airway placement is noninvasive and effective.

Keywords

Anesthesia;  Child;  Laryngeal mask airway;  Ultrasonography

References

[1] V.G. Jazbeck-Karam, M.T. Aouad, A.S. Baraka Laryngeal mask airway for ventilation during diagnostic and interventional fibreoptic bronchoscopy in children Paediatr Anaesth., 13 (2003), pp. 691-694

[2] SH Yu, OR Beirne Laryngeal mask airways have a lower risk of airway complications compared with endotracheal intubation: a systematic review J Oral Maxillofac Surg., 68 (2010), pp. 2359-2376

[3] K. Song, J. Yi, W. Liu, et al. Confirmation of laryngeal mask airway placement by ultrasound examination: a pilot study J Clin Anesth., 34 (2016), pp. 638-646

[4] C. Keller, J. Brimacombe, K. Keller, et al. Comparison of four methods for assessing airway sealing pressure with the laryngeal mask airway in adult patients Br J Anaesth., 82 (1999), pp. 286-287

[5] J.S. Park, K.J. Kim, J.T. Oh, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing Laryngeal Mask Airway removal during adequate anesthesia and after awakening in children aged 2 to 6 years J Clin Anesth., 24 (2012), pp. 537-541

[6] H. Shimbori, K. Ono, T. Miwa, et al. Comparison of the LMA-ProSeal and LMA-Classic in children Br J Anaesth., 93 (2004), pp. 528-531

[7] J. Kim, J.Y. Kim, W.O. Kim, et al. An ultrasound evaluation of laryngeal mask airway position in pediatric patients: an observational study Anesth Analg., 120 (2015), pp. 427-432

[8] A. Kaplan, G.J. Crosby, N. Bhattacharyya Airway protection and the laryngeal mask airway in sinus and nasal surgery Laryngoscope., 114 (2004), pp. 652-655

[9] B.S. Von Ungern-Sternberg, C.J. Wallace, S. Sticks, et al. Fibreoptic assessment of paediatric sized laryngeal mask airways Anaesth. Intensive Care., 38 (2010), pp. 50-54

[10] K. Goldmann, C. Jakob A randomized crossover comparison of the size 2 1/2 laryngeal mask airway ProSeal versus laryngeal mask airway-Classic in pediatric patients Anesth Analg., 100 (2005), pp. 1605-1610

[11] R.L. Campbell, C. Biddle, N. Assudmi, et al. Fiberoptic assessment of laryngeal mask airway placement: blind insertion versus direct visual epiglottoscopy J Oral Maxillofac Surg., 62 (2004), pp. 1108-1113

[12] H. Daya, W.J. Fawcett, N. Weir Vocal fold palsy after use of the laryngeal mask airway J Laryngol Otol., 110 (1996), pp. 383-384

[13] S. Joshi, R.R. Sciacca, D.R. Solanki, et al. A prospective evaluation of clinical tests for placement of laryngeal mask airways Anesthesiology., 89 (1998), pp. 1141-1146

[14] D. Gupta, A. Srirajakalidindi, N. Habli, et al. Ultrasound confirmation of laryngeal mask airway placement correlates with fiberoptic laryngoscope findings Middle East J Anaesthesiol., 21 (2011), pp. 283-287

[15] B. Ghai, J. Ram, J.K. Makkar, et al. Fiber-optic assessment of LMA position in children: a randomized crossover comparison of two techniques Paediatr Anaesth., 21 (2011), pp. 1142-1147

[16] CR Soh, AS Ng Laryngeal mask airway insertion in paediatric anaesthesia: comparison between the reverse and standard techniques Anaesth Intensive Care., 29 (2001), pp. 515-519

[17] Y. Tsujimura Downfolding of the epiglottis induced by the laryngeal mask airway in children: a comparison between two insertion techniques Paediatr Anaesth., 11 (2001), pp. 651-655

[18] K. Goldmann, C. Jakob Size 2 ProSeal laryngeal mask airway: a randomized, crossover investigation with the standard laryngeal mask airway in paediatric patients Br J Anaesth., 94 (2005), pp. 385-389

[19] K. Goldmann, C. Roettger, H. Wulf The size 1(1/2) ProSeal laryngeal mask airway in infants: a randomized, crossover investigation with the Classic laryngeal mask airway Anesth Analg., 102 (2006), pp. 405-410

[20] J.G. Karippacheril, E. Varghese Crossover comparison of airway sealing pressures of 1.5 and 2 size LMA-ProSeal™ and LMA-Classic™ in children, measured with the manometric stability test Paediatr Anaesth, 21 (2011), pp. 668-672

[21] A. Mir Ghassemi, V. Neira, L.A. Ufholz, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of acute severe complications of pediatric anesthesia Paediatr. Anaesth., 25 (2015), pp. 1093-1102

[22] B.S. Von Ungern-Sternberg, K. Boda, N.A. Chambers, et al. Risk assessment for respiratory complications in paediatric anaesthesia: a prospective cohort study Lancet., 376 (2010), pp. 773-783

[23] N Rolf, CJ Cote Frequency and severity of desaturation events during general anesthesia in children with and without upper respiratory infections J. Clin. Anesth., 4 (1992), pp. 200-203

[24] L. Li, Z. Zhang, Z. Yao, et al. The impact of laryngeal mask versus other airways on perioperative respiratory adverse events in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Int J Surg., 64 (2019), pp. 40-48

[25] J. Brimacombe, A. Berry Insertion of the laryngeal mask airway – a prospective study of four techniques Anaesth Intensive Care., 21 (1993), pp. 89-92

[26] MS Cooke, SH Wei A comparative study of southern Chinese and British Caucasian cephalometric standards Angle Orthod., 59 (1989), pp. 131-138

[27] A.M. Alzahem, M. Aqil, T.A. Alzahrani, et al. Ambu AuraOnce versus i-gel laryngeal mask airway in infants and children undergoing surgical procedures. A randomized controlled trial Saudi Med J., 38 (2017), pp. 482-490
 

602694d40e8825c67f68ae7a rba Articles
Links & Downloads

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections