A Randomized Trial of Laryngeal Mask Airway in Neonatal Resuscitation.
Journal
The New England journal of medicine
ISSN: 1533-4406
Titre abrégé: N Engl J Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0255562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 11 2020
26 11 2020
Historique:
entrez:
30
11
2020
pubmed:
1
12
2020
medline:
19
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Face-mask ventilation is the most common resuscitation method for birth asphyxia. Ventilation with a cuffless laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has potential advantages over face-mask ventilation during neonatal resuscitation in low-income countries, but whether the use of an LMA reduces mortality and morbidity among neonates with asphyxia is unknown. In this phase 3, open-label, superiority trial in Uganda, we randomly assigned neonates who required positive-pressure ventilation to be treated by a midwife with an LMA or with face-mask ventilation. All the neonates had an estimated gestational age of at least 34 weeks, an estimated birth weight of at least 2000 g, or both. The primary outcome was a composite of death within 7 days or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) with moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy at day 1 to 5 during hospitalization. Complete follow-up data were available for 99.2% of the neonates. A primary outcome event occurred in 154 of 563 neonates (27.4%) in the LMA group and 144 of 591 (24.4%) in the face-mask group (adjusted relative risk, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.51; P = 0.26). Death within 7 days occurred in 21.7% of the neonates in the LMA group and 18.4% of those in the face-mask group (adjusted relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.63), and admission to the NICU with moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy at day 1 to 5 during hospitalization occurred in 11.2% and 10.1%, respectively (adjusted relative risk, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.93). Findings were materially unchanged in a sensitivity analysis in which neonates with missing data were counted as having had a primary outcome event in the LMA group and as not having had such an event in the face-mask group. The frequency of predefined intervention-related adverse events was similar in the two groups. In neonates with asphyxia, the LMA was safe in the hands of midwives but was not superior to face-mask ventilation with respect to early neonatal death and moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway and the Center for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health; NeoSupra ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03133572.).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Face-mask ventilation is the most common resuscitation method for birth asphyxia. Ventilation with a cuffless laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has potential advantages over face-mask ventilation during neonatal resuscitation in low-income countries, but whether the use of an LMA reduces mortality and morbidity among neonates with asphyxia is unknown.
METHODS
In this phase 3, open-label, superiority trial in Uganda, we randomly assigned neonates who required positive-pressure ventilation to be treated by a midwife with an LMA or with face-mask ventilation. All the neonates had an estimated gestational age of at least 34 weeks, an estimated birth weight of at least 2000 g, or both. The primary outcome was a composite of death within 7 days or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) with moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy at day 1 to 5 during hospitalization.
RESULTS
Complete follow-up data were available for 99.2% of the neonates. A primary outcome event occurred in 154 of 563 neonates (27.4%) in the LMA group and 144 of 591 (24.4%) in the face-mask group (adjusted relative risk, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.51; P = 0.26). Death within 7 days occurred in 21.7% of the neonates in the LMA group and 18.4% of those in the face-mask group (adjusted relative risk, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.63), and admission to the NICU with moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy at day 1 to 5 during hospitalization occurred in 11.2% and 10.1%, respectively (adjusted relative risk, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.93). Findings were materially unchanged in a sensitivity analysis in which neonates with missing data were counted as having had a primary outcome event in the LMA group and as not having had such an event in the face-mask group. The frequency of predefined intervention-related adverse events was similar in the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In neonates with asphyxia, the LMA was safe in the hands of midwives but was not superior to face-mask ventilation with respect to early neonatal death and moderate-to-severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. (Funded by the Research Council of Norway and the Center for Intervention Science in Maternal and Child Health; NeoSupra ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03133572.).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33252870
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2005333
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03133572']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Comparative Study
Equivalence Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2138-2147Subventions
Organisme : Norges Forskningsråd
ID : grant 250531
Pays : International
Organisme : United States
ID : grant 223269
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.