Paediatric video laryngoscopy and airway management: What's the clinical evidence?

Out-of-Hospital Pediatric Video Laryngoscopy With an Adult Device: A Case Series Presented With a Contemporary Group Intubated With Direct Laryngoscopy

OBJECTIVES

After introducing an adult video laryngoscope (VL) in our physician-paramedic prehospital and retrieval medical service, our quality assurance process identified this blade being used during pediatric intubations. We present a case series of pediatric intubations using this oversized adult VL alongside a contemporaneous group of direct laryngoscopy (DL) intubations.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of intubated patients 15 years or younger in our electronic quality assurance registry from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2020. Data collected were demographic details, intubation equipment, drug doses, the number of intubation attempts, and complications. Results are presented according to those intubated with C-MAC4 VL (Karl Storz) alongside age-appropriate DL sizes.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine pediatric patients were intubated, 67 (67%) by CMAC4 and 32 (33%) by DL. Video laryngoscopy had a first-attempt success rate of 96% and DL 91%. A Cormach and Lehane view 1 or 2 was found in 66 VL (99%) and 29 DL patients (91%). Desaturation was reported in two VL and 1 DL patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Adult VL became the most common method of intubation in patients older than 1 year during the study period. An adult C-MAC4 VL could be considered for clinicians who prefer VL when a pediatric VL is unavailable or as a second-line device if a pediatric VL is not present when intubating children older than 1 year.

Comparison of direct and video laryngoscope endotracheal intubations by pediatric residents: A study of a child model with normal airway

Objective

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of direct and videolaryngoscopy procedures performed by pediatric residents who had limited experience of direct endotracheal intubation and had not previously used video laryngoscopes in a normal airway child manikin.

Material and Methods

The endotracheal intubations performed by pediatric residents with a direct laryngoscope and Storz C-MAC videolaryngoscope on a pediatric manikin with a normal airway were compared. Theoretical and practical training was given before the study. In the first attempt, the success of the intubation procedure, glottis visual duration, and endotracheal tube insertion time were determined. Practitioners grouped the glottis image between 1-4 according to the Cormack-Lehane Staging (Stage 1 ideal image). After the intervention, the participants scored one to ten points on direct and videolaryngoscopy (1 not useful, 10 very useful).

Results

The success of direct and videolaryngoscopy of 51 pediatric residents on the same manikin was 48 out of 51 (94%) for each method (P> 0.05). Glottis visual duration was similar in both methods (P>0.05); tube insertion and total intubation time were shorter in the video laryngoscope group (P<0.05); glottis image was better in the video laryngoscope group according to Cormack-Lehane Classification (P<0.05). Participants' rating was higher on videolaryngoscope (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Users with limited endotracheal intubation experience use Video laryncoscope more effectively than direct laryngoscope in children with normal airway model after training.

Comparison of Miller laryngoscope and UEScope videolaryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in four pediatric airway scenarios: a randomized, crossover simulation trial

With different videolaryngoscopes for pediatric patients available, UEScope can be used in all age groups. The aim of this study was to compare the Miller laryngoscope and UEScope in pediatric intubation by paramedics in different scenarios. Overall, 93 paramedics with no experience in pediatric intubation or videolaryngoscopy performed endotracheal intubation in scenarios: (A) normal airway without chest compressions, (B) difficult airway without chest compressions, (C) normal airway with uninterrupted chest compressions, (D) difficult airway with uninterrupted chest compressions. Scenario A. Total intubation success with both laryngoscopes: 100%. First-attempt success: 100% for UEScope, 96.8% for Miller. Median intubation time for UEScope: 13 s [IQR, 12.5-17], statistically significantly lower than for Miller: 14 s [IQR, 12-19.5] (p = 0.044). Scenario B. Total efficacy: 81.7% for Miller, 100% for UEScope (p = 0.012). First-attempt success: 48.4% for Miller, 87.1% for UEScope (p = 0.001). Median intubation time: 27 s [IQR, 21-33] with Miller, 15 s [IQR, 14-21] with UEScope (p = 0.001). Scenario C. Total efficiency: 91.4% with Miller, 100% with UEScope (p = 0.018); first-attempt success: 67.7 vs. 90.3% (p = 0.003), respectively. Intubation time: 21 s [IQR, 18-28] for Miller, 15 s [IQR, 12-19.5] for UEScope. Scenario D. Total efficiency: 65.6% with Miller, 98.9% with UEScope (p < 0.001); first-attempt success: 29.1 vs. 72% (p = 0.001), respectively. Intubation time: 38 s [IQR, 23-46] for Miller, 21 s [IQR, 17-25.5] for UEScope.Conclusion: In pediatric normal airway without chest compressions, UEScope is comparable with Miller. In difficult pediatric airways without chest compressions, UEScope offers better first-attempt success, shorted median intubation time, and improved glottic visualization. With uninterrupted chest compressions in normal or difficult airway, UEScope provides a higher first-attempt success, a shorter median intubation time, and a better glottic visualization than Miller laryngoscope. What is Known: • Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for adult and children airway management. • More than two direct laryngoscopy attempts in children with difficult airways are associated with a high failure rate and increased incidence of severe complications. What is New: • In difficult pediatric airways with or without chest compressions, UEScope in inexperienced providers in simulated settings provides better first-attempt efficiency, median intubation time, and glottic visualization.