Evaluation of three unchannelled videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with a simulated difficult airway: a randomised, controlled trial

Anaesthesia

Volumn 72, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 370-378

  Kleine Brueggeney, M ^a,b   Buttenberg, M ^b   Greif, R ^b   Nabecker, S ^b   Theiler, L ^b  

^a ST BARTHOLOMEW S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

difficult airway management; intubation; laryngoscopy; unchannelled videolaryngoscopes

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; BRONCHOSPASM; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DYSPHAGIA; ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION; ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE; FEMALE; HOARSENESS; HUMAN; LIGHT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); MIDDLE AGED; ODYNOPHAGIA; POST HOC ANALYSIS; POSTOPERATIVE NAUSEA AND VOMITING; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESPIRATION CONTROL; RESPIRATORY TRACT INTUBATION; RIGID LARYNGOSCOPE; SORE THROAT; TOOTH INJURY; UNCHANNELLED VIDEOLARYNGOSCOPE; VIDEOLARYNGOSCOPE; ADVERSE DEVICE EFFECT; AGED; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; LARYNGOSCOPE; LARYNGOSCOPY; PROCEDURES; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VIDEORECORDING;

ADULT; AGED; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUBATION, INTRATRACHEAL; LARYNGOSCOPES; LARYNGOSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 85012019723     PISSN: 00032409     EISSN: 13652044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/anae.13714     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Suppan L, Tramer MR, Niquille M, Grosgurin O, Marti C. Alternative intubation techniques vs Macintosh laryngoscopy in patients with cervical spine immobilization: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2016; 116: 27–36.
2. Kleine-Brueggeney M, Greif R, Schoettker P, Savoldelli G, Nabecker S, Theiler LG. Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway - A multicenter randomized controlled trial. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2016; 116: 670–9.
3. De Jong A, Molinari N, Conseil M, et al. Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for orotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Medicine 2014; 40: 629–39.
4. Gaszynska E, Samsel P, Stankiewicz-Rudnicki M, Wieczorek A, Gaszynski T. Intubation by paramedics using the ILMA or AirTraq, KingVision, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in vehicle-entrapped patients: a manikin study. European Journal of Emergency Medicine 2014; 21: 61–4.
5. Kill C, Risse J, Wallot P, Seidl P, Steinfeldt T, Wulf H. Videolaryngoscopy with glidescope reduces cervical spine movement in patients with unsecured cervical spine. Journal of Emergency Medicine 2013; 44: 750–6.
6. Byhahn C, Iber T, Zacharowski K, et al. Tracheal intubation using the mobile C-MAC video laryngoscope or direct laryngoscopy for patients with a simulated difficult airway. Minerva Anestesiologica 2010; 76: 577–83.
7. Aziz MF, Dillman D, Fu R, Brambrink AM. Comparative effectiveness of the C-MAC video laryngoscope versus direct laryngoscopy in the setting of the predicted difficult airway. Anesthesiology 2012; 116: 629–36.
8. Cavus E, Neumann T, Doerges V, et al. First clinical evaluation of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope during routine and difficult intubation. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2011; 112: 382–5.
9. Taylor AM, Peck M, Launcelott S, et al. The McGrath(R) Series 5 videolaryngoscope vs the Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomised, controlled trial in patients with a simulated difficult airway. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 142–7.
10. Sakles JC, Mosier JM, Patanwala AE, Dicken JM, Kalin L, Javedani PP. The C-MAC video laryngoscope is superior to the direct laryngoscope for the rescue of failed first-attempt intubations in the emergency department. Journal of Emergency Medicine 2015; 48: 280–6.
11. Rosenstock CV, Thøgersen B, Afshari A, Christensen AL, Eriksen C, Gätke MR. Awake fiberoptic or awake video laryngoscopic tracheal intubation in patients with anticipated difficult airway management: a randomized clinical trial. Anesthesiology 2012; 116: 1210–6.
12. Kramer A, Muller D, Pfortner R, Mohr C, Groeben H. Fibreoptic vs videolaryngoscopic (C-MAC(®) D-BLADE) nasal awake intubation under local anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2015; 70: 400–6.
13. Theiler L, Hermann K, Schoettker P, et al. SWIVIT–Swiss video-intubation trial evaluating video-laryngoscopes in a simulated difficult airway scenario: study protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial in Switzerland. Trials 2013; 14: 94.
14. St Mont G, Biesler I, Pförtner R, Mohr C, Groeben H. Easy and difficult nasal intubation–a randomised comparison of Macintosh vs Airtraq laryngoscopes. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 132–8.
15. Staar S, Biesler I, Müller D, Pförtner R, Mohr C, Groeben H. Nasotracheal intubation with three indirect laryngoscopes assisted by standard or modified Magill forceps. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 467–71.
16. Okada D, Komasawa N, Fujiwara S, Minami T. Comparison of tube-guided and guideless videolaryngoscope for tracheal intubation during chest compression in a manikin: a randomized crossover trial. Journal of Anesthesia 2015; 29: 331–7.
17. Hodd JA, Doyle DJ, Gupta S, et al. A mannequin study of intubation with the AP advance and GlideScope Ranger videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2011; 113: 791–800.
18. Bathory I, Frascarolo P, Kern C, Schoettker P. Evaluation of the GlideScope for tracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilisation by a semi-rigid collar. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 1337–41.
19. Levitan RM, Ochroch EA, Kush S, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Assessment of airway visualization: validation of the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scale. Academic Emergency Medicine 1998; 5: 919–23.
20. 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: 1290–7.
21. Kleine-Brueggeney M, Nicolet A, Nabecker S, et al. Blind intubation of anaesthetised children with supraglottic airway devices AmbuAura-i and Air-Q cannot be recommended: a randomised controlled trial. European Journal of Anaesthesiology 2015; 32: 631–9.
22. Puchner W, Drabauer L, Kern K, et al. Indirect versus direct laryngoscopy for routine nasotracheal intubation. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 2011; 23: 280–5.
23. Jeon WJ, Shim JH, Cho SY, Baek SJ. Stylet- or forceps-guided tube exchanger to facilitate GlideScope intubation in simulated difficult intubations–a randomised controlled trial. Anaesthesia 2013; 68: 585–90.
24. Serocki G, Neumann T, Scharf E, Dörges V, Cavus E. Indirect videolaryngoscopy with C-MAC D-Blade and GlideScope: a randomized, controlled comparison in patients with suspected difficult airways. Minerva Anestesiologica 2013; 79: 121–9.
25. Aziz MF, Abrons RO, Cattano D, et al. First-attempt intubation success of video laryngoscopy in patients with anticipated difficult direct laryngoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the C-MAC D-blade versus the GlideScope in a mixed provider and diverse patient population. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2016; 122: 740–50.
26. Ng I, Hill AL, Williams DL, Lee K, Segal R. Randomized controlled trial comparing the McGrath videolaryngoscope with the C-MAC videolaryngoscope in intubating adult patients with potential difficult airways. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2012; 109: 439–43.
27. Enomoto Y, Asai T, Arai T, Kamishima K, Okuda Y. Pentax-AWS, a new videolaryngoscope, is more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in patients with restricted neck movements: a randomized comparative study. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008; 100: 544–8.
28. McElwain J, Laffey JG. Comparison of the C-MAC, Airtraq, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilization. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2011; 107: 258–64.
29. Ali QE, Das B, Amir SH, Siddiqui OA, Jamil S. Comparison of the Airtraq and McCoy laryngoscopes using a rigid neck collar in patients with simulated difficult laryngoscopy. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 2014; 26: 199–203.
30. Theiler LG, Kleine-Brueggeney M, Kaiser D, et al. Crossover comparison of the laryngeal mask supreme and the i-gel in simulated difficult airway scenario in anesthetized patients. Anesthesiology 2009; 111: 55–62.
31. Peterson GN, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Posner KL, Lee LA, Cheney FW. Management of the difficult airway: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 2005; 103: 33–9.
32. Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Major complications of airway management in the UK: results of the Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. Part 1: Anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2011; 106: 617–31.
33. Konrad C, Schüpfer G, Wietlisbach M, Gerber H. Learning manual skills in anesthesiology: is there a recommended number of cases for anesthetic procedures? Anesthesia and Analgesia 1998; 86: 635–9.
34. Pandit JJ. If it hasn't failed, does it work? On ‘the worst we can expect’ from observational trial results, with reference to airway management devices. Anaesthesia 2012; 67: 578–83.