Table 1

 Evaluation of laryngeal mask airway for neonatal resuscitation in three studies

Gandini & Brimacombe15Paterson et al42Trevisanuto et al43
Unless otherwise indicated, data are expressed as mean (SD) or median (range).
*Data are for two groups of patients (low birthweight and term infants respectively).
CPAP, Continuous positive airway pressure; HR, heart rate; LMA, laryngeal mask airway; NA, not available; NICU, neonatal intensive care unit; PPV, positive pressure ventilation.
Study designObservational, prospectiveObservational, prospectiveObservational, retrospective
Study period2 months5 years12 months
No of patients21104 (29+75)*95
No of operators3110
Training (uses/operator)8510
Gestational age (weeks)38 (2)37 (34–42), 32 (28–37)39 (29–42)
Birth weight (kg)3.3 (0.6)3.7 (2.7–4.7), 2.0 (1.2–2.4)3.1 (0.9–4.9)
Caesarean section (%)NA7845
Apgar score (5 min)8 (5–10)9 (7–10), 8 (6–10)9 (5–10)
Indication for LMA useApnoea/HR<100/minApnoea/HR<100/minApnoea/HR<100/min
Insertion attempts (1/2)21/0104/095/0
Time for LMA insertion (seconds)8.6 (1.4)NANA
Duration of LMA placement (seconds)80 (61) (PPV) 55 (28) (CPAP)42 (19–408)74 (32–904)
Efficacy (%)959999
Time to reach adequate oxygenation (seconds)<6019<30
Late intubation1 (4.7%)6 (5.7%)5 (5.2%)
Audible peak pressure (cm H2O)22 (3)22 (15–32), 24 (16–36)NA
Peak pressure obtained (cm H2O)37 (3)NANA
Admission to NICU (%)15NA21
No of complications
    Pneumothorax101
    Gastric insufflation000