Comparison of Laryngeal Mask Airway Versus Endotracheal Intubation in Pediatric Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair

Overview

Inguinal hernia is one of the most common conditions requiring surgical intervention in childhood, with a reported lifetime prevalence of 1-4%. With the increasing use of minimally invasive techniques such as PIRS (Percutaneous Internal Ring Suturing) among laparoscopic surgical procedures, perioperative anesthesia and airway management have become a critical area of clinical decision-making. The traditional approach in pediatric laparoscopic surgery is endotracheal intubation (ETT). Although ETT provides reliable airway control, it carries certain disadvantages. In contrast, the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is less invasive and is associated with faster recovery. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses conducted in recent years have shown that the LMA may be safe for ventilation in pediatric laparoscopy, reduces peak airway pressure, and shortens recovery time. No well-designed, multicenter study with an adequate sample size comparing the LMA and ETT in pediatric laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery has yet been conducted. This gap limits evidence-based decision-making in a clinical setting that directly impacts practice. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare LMA and ETT in pediatric laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. In this regard, the study is unique and necessary from both clinical and academic perspectives for determining the optimal airway strategy in pediatric laparoscopy.

This study is designed as a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial to compare laryngeal mask airway (LMA) and endotracheal intubation (ETT) in pediatric laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Conditions