الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 182 |  |  |
| | | from | 182 | | |
Abstract
Background: Difficult airway management in neonates and small infants still remains a challenge, even for well-trained pediatricians or anesthesiologists. This holds true particularly when a difficult airway is encountered unexpectedly. Approximately 5–10% of the newly-born population requires some degree of active resuscitation at birth. Lack of availability of smaller sizes of LMA for very preterm infants limits its use to only near term or term gestation babies requiring resuscitation. Aim: Subjects and Methods: The Study included 80 newborns delivered in the maternity hospital, Ain Shams University with gestational age of 34 weeks or more and who needed neonatal resuscitation in the delivery room which was performed according to the current guidelines for neonatal resuscitation by the American Academy of Pediatrics. In our study, the ventilation time in the LM group appeared to be seemed slightly shorter than that in the ETT group. Results: Compared with ETT, the potential advantages of using an LM include rapid insertion without requiring laryngoscopy and a higher first attempt success rate, even among novice providers. Conclusion: Our study showed that the LM had similar effectiveness to ETT when resuscitating moderate/severely depressed newborns. The present study confirms that the LM may be used as the first alternative airway, instead of ETT, to provide positive-pressure ventilation among newborns who do not respond to face mask ventilation. Recommendations: Medical Personnel should be trained on using LMA in neonatal resusitation and need to be better oriented with conditions where the Laryngeal mask may be needed. Further parameters such as Pink up time could be added in future studies.