Published randomised controlled trials describing surfactant administration by supraglottic airway
| Comparison | Study | Number of infants | Gestation at birth (weeks)* | Birth weight (g)* | Device† | Surfactant dose (mg/kg) | Mechanical ventilation rate | |||
| Supraglottic airway | Control group | Supraglottic airway | Control group | Supraglottic airway | Control group | |||||
| Supraglottic airway surfactant versus continued CPAP | Attridge et al 42 | 26 | 34 (31–35) | 32 (31–35) | 2001 (1670–2820) | 2130 (1799–2570) | Classic LMA | 107 | 1/13 (8%) | 3/13 (23%) |
| Roberts et al 33 | 103 | 33±2 | 33±2 | 1968±506 | 1995±483 | LMA Unique, size 1 | 200 | 19/50 (38%) | 34/53 (64%) | |
| Supraglottic airway surfactant versus surfactant by endotracheal tube | Sadeghnia et al 34 | 70 | 34±1 | 35±1 | 2352±318 | 2999±523 | i-gel | 100 | 0/35 (0%) | 0/35 (0%) |
| Pinheiro et al 35 | 60 | 37%<33 weeks, 63%≥33 weeks | 60%<33 weeks, 40%≥33 weeks | 2118 (range 1150–3984) | 1945 (range 1015–3700) | Classic LMA | 107 | 9/30 (30%) | 21/30 (70%) | |
| Barbosa et al 37 | 48 | 31 (range 28–34) | 32 (range 28–35) | 1515 (range 1025–2295) | 1495 (range 1005–2515) | ProSeal LMA, size 1 | 200 | 12/26 (46%) | 22/22 (100%) | |
| Gharehbaghi et al 36 | 50 | 33±1 | 34±2 | 2078±669 | 2198±669 | Hangzhou Laryngeal Mask, size 1 | 100 | 1/25 (4%) | 4/25 (16%) | |
*Data are median (IQR) or mean±SD unless stated.
†Manufacturer details: Classic LMA, LMA Unique and ProSeal LMA, Teleflex Medical, Wayne, Pennsylvania, USA; i-gel, Wokingham, Berkshire, UK; Hangzhou Laryngeal Mask, Hangzhou Shanyou Co Ltd, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
CPAP, continuous positive airway pressure; LMA, laryngeal mask airway.