Compare the Efficacy of Different Laryngeal Mask Size Selection Methods in General Anesthesia in Children
1 other identifier
interventional
392
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The laryngeal mask is widely used in general anesthesia in children. Selection of an appropriately sized laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is critical to ensure safe and effective use of the device. In children, the appropriate size of the LMA to be used is usually determined by the patient's weight. Up to now, this is the gold standard method, but the weight-related technique is not always possible. The patient's weight is sometimes unknown or medical staff do not remember the relationship between weight and size. Moreover, there are no constant correlations between laryngeal airways and body indices such as height and weight, so that the standard method could cause an inappropriate size of laryngeal mask airway to be chosen. Researchers from Spain introduced a new technique to determine the size of the LMA in children by choosing the LMA that best matched the combined widths of the patient's index, middle and ring fingers, but needs to be formally evaluated in clinical application. In order to compare the application effects of two methods (weight-related and three-fingers), we designed a research plan.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Feb 2019
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
February 16, 2019
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
February 19, 2019
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
February 25, 2019
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2019
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 25, 2019
CompletedFebruary 17, 2020
February 1, 2020
2 months
February 16, 2019
February 13, 2020
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
oropharyngeal leak pressure (OLP)
With the child's head in a neutral position, OLP was measured by closing the expiratory valve of the circle system at a fixed gas flow of 3 l/minute, recording the airway pressure at which equilibrium was reached. Gas leakage was evaluated at the mouth (by detecting an audible sound) and stomach (by epigastric auscultation).
The OLP was measured after the laryngeal mask was successfully inserted and fixed, and the cuff was inflated.
Secondary Outcomes (3)
insertion time
The time to successful insertion was measured from the time of facemask removal until the time at which bilateral chest expansion was observed.
grade of fibreoptic view
The grade of fibreoptic view was measured after the laryngeal mask was successfully inserted and fixed, and the cuff was inflated.
postoperative sore throat
Immediately after the patient wakes up and 24 hours after surgery
Study Arms (2)
three-finger method
EXPERIMENTALThe size of the laryngeal mask airway was determined by choosing the laryngeal mask that best matched the combined widths of the patient's index, middle and ring fingers. That is what we call the three-finger method. The intervention is to use the three-finger method.
weight-related method
ACTIVE COMPARATORThe size of the laryngeal mask airway for each patient was determined by the manufacturer's weight-related guidelines. That is what we call the weight-related method. The intervention is to use the weight-related method.
Interventions
The size of the laryngeal mask airway was determined by choosing the laryngeal mask that best matched the combined widths of the patient's index, middle and ring fingers.
The size of the laryngeal mask airway was determined by the patient's weight.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- children aged from 3 to 14yr, underwent elective ophthalmic surgery, had an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status rating of I or II
You may not qualify if:
- Patients with lung disease, known airway problems, upper respiratory tract symptoms or any condition that may increase the risk of gastro-oesophageal regurgitation, or any anatomical abnormalities, especially those related to the head, neck or limbs.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Jie Jia
Shanghai, 021, China
Related Publications (2)
Gallart L, Mases A, Martinez J, Montes A, Fernandez-Galinski S, Puig MM. Simple method to determine the size of the laryngeal mask airway in children. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2003 Jul;20(7):570-4. doi: 10.1017/s0265021503000917.
PMID: 12884992BACKGROUNDKapila A, Addy EV, Verghese C, Brain AI. The intubating laryngeal mask airway: an initial assessment of performance. Br J Anaesth. 1997 Dec;79(6):710-3. doi: 10.1093/bja/79.6.710.
PMID: 9496200BACKGROUND
Study Officials
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Jie Jia
Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- TRIPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Attending physician
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
February 16, 2019
First Posted
February 19, 2019
Study Start
February 25, 2019
Primary Completion
May 1, 2019
Study Completion
May 25, 2019
Last Updated
February 17, 2020
Record last verified: 2020-02
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share