Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35626910›Full record

ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Laryngeal Masks in Neonatal Resuscitation-A Narrative Review of Updates 2022.

Srinivasan Mani, Joaquim M B Pinheiro, Munmun Rawat

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Practical Way to Use Supraglottic Airway Device.Current pediatric reviews · 2026
    Review
  4. Exploring the role of laryngeal masks in neonatal resuscitation.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2024
    Article
  5. Less invasive surfactant administration methods: Who, what and how.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Srinivasan ManiPediatrics, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43606, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6604-2391
Joaquim M B PinheiroPediatrics, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY 12208, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3973-7045
Munmun RawatPediatrics, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9703-9857
Albany Medical Center Hospital · USUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · USUniversity of Toledo · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Positive pressure ventilation (PPV) is crucial to neonatal cardiopulmonary resuscitation because respiratory failure precedes cardiac failure in newborns affected by perinatal asphyxia. Prolonged ineffective PPV could lead to a need for advanced resuscitation such as intubation, chest compression, and epinephrine. Every 30 s delay in initiation of PPV increased the risk of death or morbidity by 16%. The most effective interface for providing PPV in the early phases of resuscitation is still unclear. Laryngeal masks (LMs) are supraglottic airway devices that provide less invasive and relatively stable airway access without the need for laryngoscopy which have been studied as an alternative to face masks and endotracheal tubes in the initial stages of neonatal resuscitation. A meta-analysis found that LM is a safe and more effective alternative to face mask ventilation in neonatal resuscitation. LM is recommended as an alternative secondary airway device for the resuscitation of infants > 34 weeks by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. It is adopted by various national neonatal resuscitation guidelines across the globe. Recent good-quality randomized trials have enhanced our understanding of the utility of laryngeal masks in low-resource settings. Nevertheless, LM is underutilized due to its variable availability in delivery rooms, providers’ limited experience, insufficient training, preference for endotracheal tube, and lack of awareness.

Indexed as

infantlaryngeal masksneonateresuscitation

Identifiers

PMID35626910
PMCPMC9139380
OpenAlexW4280584298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.