A Comparative Study of the ProSeal Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Endotracheal Tube in Neonates With Anorectal Malformations

Background: Laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) are widely used in paediatric anaesthesia. However, LMA use in neonatal age groups (younger than seven days) is limited because many anaesthesiologists prefer to use endotracheal tube in neonates. In this study, we compared the ProSeal LMA and endotracheal tube by measuring their performance, including ease of insertion via number of attempts for placement of device, total effective time for intubation and extubation, hemodynamic responses and perioperative complications. Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 70 patients (neonates) weighing >2.5 kg, with American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) classification grade 4 requiring emergency surgery for anorectal malformation were enrolled and divided into two groups. After induction, patients' airways were secured with either ProSeal LMA size 1 (Group I) or endotracheal tube (Group II). Anaesthesia was maintained on oxygen and sevoflurane with muscle relaxant atracurium. Results: Demographic and surgical data were similar between the two groups. The ProSeal LMA insertion time was shorter than endotracheal intubation. Hemodynamic variations were less in the ProSeal LMA group as compared to the endotracheal tube group. The total time for removal of airway devices from the end of surgery for the ProSeal group was lower than that for the endotracheal intubation group. Postoperative complications were less in the ProSeal group as compared to the endotracheal group. Conclusions: The ProSeal LMA can be a better alternative to the endotracheal tube in neonates due to the ease of insertion, lesser changes in hemodynamic parameters and minimal postoperative complications.

Automated summary

The study revealed that in neonates, the ProSeal LMA has a shorter insertion time, less hemodynamic variations, and fewer postoperative complications compared to endotracheal tubes.