Comment on: ‘Evaluation of I‐Gel™ size 2 airway in different degrees of neck flexion in anesthetized children—a prospective, self‐controlled trial’

Abstract

2 Henderson CM, FitzGerald M, Hoehn KS et al. Pediatrician ambiguity in understanding palliative sedation at the end of life. Am J Hospice Palliative Med 2015; 1-15. 3 Gurschick L, Mayer DK, Hanson LC. Palliative sedation: an analysis of international guidelines and position statements. Am J Hosp Palliat Care 2015; 32: 660-671. 4 Johnson LM, Snaman JM, Cupit MC et al. End-of-life care for hospitalized children. Pediatr Clin North Am 2014; 61: 835-854. 5 Anghelescu DL, Faughnan LG, Baker JN et al. Use of epidural and peripheral nerve blocks at the end of life in children and young adults with cancer: the collaboration between a pain service and a palliative care service.SIR-With great interest, we read the article entitled 'Evaluation of I-Gel TM size 2 airway in different degrees of neck flexion in anesthetized children-a prospective, self-controlled trial' (1). We acknowledge this study is interesting and meaningful for our clinical work. Nevertheless, the insertion depth of the laryngeal mask airway has not been described in the paper but may have an effect on the experimental results. As we know, only with adequate depth of laryngeal mask airway insertion can we get a good seal and good tidal ventilation. However, the depth is not precise, it is a range. Within the range, both the attainable peak pressures and the glottic view may vary considerably; moreover, the less depth can result in a better glottic view (2). So different depths may produce different results while positioning the neck flexion at 15°, 30°, and 45°. We wonder if the authors can address the details of the insertion depth. Ethics approvalNo necessary ethics approvals.