NCT03845998

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

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
392

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Feb 2019

Shorter than P25 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

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

Completed
3 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

February 19, 2019

Completed
6 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

February 25, 2019

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

May 1, 2019

Completed
24 days until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

May 25, 2019

Completed
Last Updated

February 17, 2020

Status Verified

February 1, 2020

Enrollment Period

2 months

First QC Date

February 16, 2019

Last Update Submit

February 13, 2020

Conditions

Keywords

airwayanaesthesialaryngeal mask airwaypaediatric

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

EXPERIMENTAL

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. That is what we call the three-finger method. The intervention is to use the three-finger method.

Procedure: use the three-finger method

weight-related method

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

The 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.

Procedure: 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.

three-finger method

The size of the laryngeal mask airway was determined by the patient's weight.

weight-related method

Eligibility Criteria

Age3 Years - 14 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsChild (0-17)

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

Location

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: 12884992BACKGROUND
  • Kapila 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

  • Jie Jia

    Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University

    STUDY DIRECTOR

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

Locations