A Comparative Study between Standard Weight‑Based Technique and Pinna Size-Based New Technique for Classic Laryngeal Mask Airway Size Selection in Pediatric Population
Introduction: The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is a non-invasive supraglottic airway device designed to maintain the airway, which sits outside of and creates a seal around the larynx. In clinical practice, the most commonly used method for size estimation is the weight-based method. However, this may not be suitable due to lack of standardization in pediatric patients, emergencies, overweight, etc. Therefore, this study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of the new pinna size-based method for the estimation of LMA size.
Materials and Methods: A total of 100 pediatric patients, aged under 15 years, undergoing ambulatory surgeries, belonging to American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) Grades I and II, were randomly divided into two groups: Weight-based and Pinna size-based estimation. Parameters such as number of attempts and change of size required were monitored.
Results: LMAs were inserted in both the groups in the first attempt. However, LMAs needed to be exchanged in 2% of cases in Group A and in 16% of cases in Group B.
Conclusion: Pinna size-based estimation for the size of LMA is a convenient and feasible alternative to the traditional weight-based estimation.
supraglottic airway devices. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19 Suppl 1:55-65.
2. Efrat R, Kadari A, Katz S. The laryngeal mask airway in pediatric
anesthesia: Experience with 120 patients undergoing elective groin surgery.
J Pediatr Surg 1994;29:206-8.
3. Patel B, Bingham R. Laryngeal mask airway and other supraglottic
airway devices in paediatric practice. Contin Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain
4. Brimacombe J, Brain AI, Berry A. Non anesthetic uses. In: The Laryngeal
Mask Airway: A Review and Practice Guide. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:
Saunders; 1997. p. 216-77.
5. Rommel N, Bellon E, Hermans R, Smet M, De Meyer AM, Feenstra L,
et al. Development of the orohypopharyngeal cavity in normal infants and
young children. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2003;40:606-11.
6. Apfelbaum JL. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway.
A report by the American society of anesthesiologists’ task force on
management of the difficult airway. Anesthesiology 1993;78:597-602.
7. Haliloglu M, Bilgen S, Uzture N, Koner O. Simple method for determining
the size of the proSeal laryngeal mask airway in children: A prospective
observational study. Braz J Anesthesiol 2017;67:15-20.
8. Zahoor A, Ahmad N, Sereche G, Riad W. A novel method for laryngeal
mask airway size selection in paediatric patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol
9. Ravi R, Mohan VK, Badhe AS, Mishra SK, Bidkar PU. Comparison of
weight-based and pinna size-based selection of proSeal laryngeal mask
airway in paediatric population a prospective exploratory trial. Indian J
10. Gallart L, Mases A, Martinez J, Montes A, Fernandez-Galinski S, Puig Simple method to determine the size of the laryngeal mask airway in
children. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2005;20:570-4.
11. Weng M, Ding M, Xu Y, Yang X, Li L, Zhong J, et al. An evaluation of
thyromental distance-based method or weight-based method in determining
the size of the laryngeal mask airway supreme: A randomized controlled
study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e2902.