• Johannes Kulnig, Lisa Füreder, Nicole Harrison, Michael Frass, and Oliver Robak.
• Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Tulln, Karl-Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Tulln, Austria.
• Eur. J. Pediatr. 2018 Jun 1; 177 (6): 871-878.

AbstractSupraglottic airway devices (SADs) have been introduced to assist medical professionals in emergency situations with limited experience in securing airways via conventional endotracheal intubation (ETI). Literature on the use of SADs for securing an airway during pediatric critical settings is scarce, and there is a lack of studies comparing different SADs to each other and to conventional ETI. We conducted a study comparing five different SADs to ETI with regard to success rate, time to first ventilation, and personal rating in a pediatric manikin under simulated physiologic and pathologic airway conditions in 41 pediatricians of varying clinical experience and training. Only the AirQ, AuraG, and laryngeal tube (LT) were inserted within 30 s correctly by all participants under physiologic conditions. In tongue edema (TE), AirQ and LT had the highest success rate. In limited mobility of the cervical spine (CS), AirQ, AuraG, and LT again all were inserted within 30 s. In a multivariate analysis, factors influencing the success were experience with the respective device and level of medical education. Under TE conditions, there were significantly longer insertion times for the ETI, laryngeal mask airway (LMA), and EzT. Under CS conditions, there were significantly longer insertion times for the ETI, LMA, LT, and EzT. A multivariate analysis showed experience with the respective device to be the only factor of influence on time to first ventilation.

22 keywords...

hide…