Comparison of TruView EVO2 with Miller laryngoscope in paediatric patients

European Journal of Anaesthesiology

Volumn 27, Issue 11, 2010, Pages 950-954

  Turan Inal, Mehmet ^a   Memis, Dilek ^a   Kargi, Murat ^a   Oktay, Zumral ^a   Sut, Necdet ^b  

^a TRAKYA UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF MEDICINE   (Turkey)

^b TRAKYA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Miller laryngoscope; Paediatric airway; TruView EVO2 laryngoscope

Indexed keywords

FENTANYL; ROCURONIUM; SEVOFLURANE;

ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION; ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE; FEMALE; GLOTTIS; HEART RATE; HUMAN; LACERATION; LARYNGOSCOPE; MALE; MEAN ARTERIAL PRESSURE; MILLER LARYNGOSCOPE; OXYGEN SATURATION; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RESPIRATORY TRACT DISEASE; RESPIRATORY TRACT EXAMINATION; SCHOOL CHILD; TOOTH INJURY; TREATMENT DURATION; TRUVIEW EVO2 LARYNGOSCOPE;

BLOOD PRESSURE; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; GLOTTIS; HEART RATE; HUMANS; INTUBATION, INTRATRACHEAL; LARYNGOSCOPES; LARYNGOSCOPY; LARYNX; MALE; OXYGEN; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 78349258589     PISSN: 02650215     EISSN: 13652346     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833f539f     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Caplan RA, Posner KL, Ward RJ, et al. Adverse respiratory events in anesthesia: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 1990; 72:828-833.
2. Holm-Knudsen RJ, Rasmussen LS. Paediatric airway management: basic aspects. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53:1-9.
3. Agró FE, Cataldo R, Mattei A. New devices and techniques for airway management. Minerva Anestesiol 2009; 75:141-149.
4. Carlino C, Pastore JC, Battistini GM, et al. Training resident anesthesiologists in adult challenging intubation comparing TruView EVO2 and Macintosh laryngoscope: a preliminary study. Minerva Anestesiol 2009; 75:563-567.
5. Mallampati SR, Gatt SP, Gugino LD, et al. A clinical sign to predict difficult tracheal intubation: a prospective study. Can Anaesth Soc J 1985; 32:429-434.
6. Bortone L, Ingelmo PM, De Ninno G, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing the laryngeal tube and the laryngeal mask in pediatric patients. Paediatr Anaesth 2006; 16:251-257.
7. Adnet F, Borron SW, Racine SX, et al. The Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS): proposal and evaluation of a new score characterizing the complexity of endotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1997; 87:1290-1297.
8. Sen I, Kumar S, Bhardwaj N, Wig J. A left paraglossal approach for oral intubation in children scheduled for bilateral orofacial cleft reconstruction surgery: a prospective observational study. Pediatr Anesth 2009; 19:159-163.
9. Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984; 39:1105-1111.
10. Malik MA, Maharaj CH, Harte BH, et al. Comparison of Macintosh, TruView EVO2, Glidescope, and Airwayscope laryngoscope use in patients with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth 2008; 101:723-730.
11. Singh R, Singh P, Vajifdar H. A comparison of TruView infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller blade in neonates and infants. Paediatr Anaesth 2009; 19:338-342.
12. Barak M, Philipchuck P, Abecassis P, et al. A comparison of the TruView blade with the Macintosh blade in adult patients. Anaesthesia 2007; 62:827-831.
13. Li JB, Xiong YC, Wang XL, et al. An evaluation of the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope. Anaesthesia 2007; 62:90-943.