Simulated endotracheal intubation of a patient with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation: a randomized comparison of the Pentax AWS, the Airtraq, and the McCoy Laryngoscopes

Assessment of the Possibility of Using the Laryngoscopes Macintosh, McCoy, Miller, Intubrite, VieScope and I-View for Intubation in Simulated Out-of-Hospital Conditions by People without Clinical Experience: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study

The aim of the study was to evaluate the laryngoscopes Macintosh, Miller, McCoy, Intubrite, VieScope and I-View in simulated out-of-hospital conditions when used by people without clinical experience, and to choose the one that, in the case of failure of the first intubation (FI), gives the highest probability of successful second (SI) or third (TI). For FI, the highest success rate (HSR) was observed for I-View and the lowest (LSR) for Macintosh (90% vs. 60%; p < 0.001); for SI, HSR was observed for I-View and LSR for Miller (95% vs. 66,7%; p < 0001); and for TI, HSR was observed for I-View and LSR for Miller, McCoy and VieScope (98.33% vs. 70%; p < 0.001). A significant shortening of intubation time between FI and TI was observed for Macintosh (38.95 (IQR: 30.1-47.025) vs. 32.4 (IQR: 29-39.175), p = 0.0132), McCoy (39.3 (IQR: 31.1-48.15) vs. 28.75 (IQR: 26.475-35.7), p < 0.001), Intubrite (26.4 (IQR: 21.4-32.3) vs. 20.7 (IQR: 18.3-24.45), p < 0.001), and I-View (21 (IQR: 17.375-25.1) vs. 18 (IQR: 15.95-20.5), p < 0.001). According to the respondents, the easiest laryngo- scopes to use were I-View and Intubrite, while the most difficult was Miller. The study shows that I-View and Intubrite are the most useful devices, combining high efficiency with a statistically significant reduction in time between successive attempts.

A noninferiority trial comparing left paratracheal pressure versus cricoid pressure on tracheal intubation conditions using the Pentax Airway Scope

There are no studies evaluating the effect of left paratracheal pressure (PP) on difficulty of intubation using Pentax Airway Scope (Pentax), so we conducted this study to show that PP was not inferior to cricoid pressure (CP) in intubation time using the Pentax. Patients aged 19-70 years, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2, and undergoing otorhinolaryngological, gynecological surgery, and cholecystectomy at a single university hospital were enrolled. Intubation was performed using the Pentax under PP or CP of 30 N. The primary outcome was intubation time, and the secondary outcomes were tube advancement difficulty and glottis view. The mean difference in intubation time (PP group - CP group) was - 4.19 s (95% CI - 8.24 to - 0.15), which was within the non-inferiority margin of 6.5 s, thus proving non-inferiority of the PP compared with the CP group. However, the score for tube advancement difficulty was significantly lower in the PP group than in the CP group (p = 0.02). PP did not prolong the intubation time and showed comparable intubation conditions to CP in intubation using the Pentax. Therefore, PP may be a good alternative maneuver to prevent gastric regurgitation during intubation using the Pentax.

Comparison of blind intubation with different supraglottic airway devices by inexperienced physicians in several airway scenarios: a manikin study

Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for airway management. Supraglottic airway devices (SADs) are useful in airway abnormalities. SAD blind intubation enables airway management with better ventilation and a reduced risk of gastric content aspiration. The aim was to compare various SADs in blind intubation performed by inexperienced physicians in several pediatric airway scenarios. One hundred sixteen physicians with no previous experience with SAD performed blind endotracheal intubations with (1) iGEL, (2) Air-Q intubating laryngeal airway, and (3) Ambu AuraGain disposable laryngeal mask in a pediatric manikin in three airway scenarios: (A) normal airway without chest compressions, (B) normal airway with continuous chest compressions with the CORPULS CPR system, and (C) difficult airway with continuous chest compressions with the CORPULS CPR system. Intubation tube with 5.0 internal diameter was used for all blind intubation attempts. First intubation success rate, median time to SAD placement, time to endotracheal intubation with SAD, and ease to perform the intubation were investigated in this study. All these parameters were better or non-inferior for iGEL in all investigated scenarios.Conclusion: Our manikin study demonstrated that iGEL was the most effective device for blind intubation by inexperienced physicians in different pediatric airway scenarios. What is Known: • For pediatric resuscitation, bag-mask ventilation is the first-line method for airway control and ventilation. • Endotracheal intubation is considered by many scientific societies the gold standard for airway management. • Supraglottic airway devices are particularly useful when bag-mask ventilation is difficult or impossible but can be also used for blind intubation. What is New: • The iGEL laryngeal mask turns out the most effective device for blind intubation by inexperienced physicians in different pediatric airway scenarios. • It may be a reasonable first emergency blind intubation technique for inexperienced physicians in pediatric patients in normal airway with and without continuous chest compressions, as well as in difficult airway with continuous chest compressions.

Laryngoscopes for difficult airway scenarios: a comparison of the available devices

INTRODUCTION

According to the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the incidence of difficult intubation in the operating room is 1.2-3.8%; however, in emergency conditions, this rate is higher and reaches even 5.3%. Successful emergency airway management is an essential component of the modern practice of medicine.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of the study is to review the literature regarding different devices used to perform endotracheal intubation (Macintosh, Miller, and McCoy laryngoscopes; ETView, GlideScope, TruView, Airtraq, McGrath MAC, Pentax AWS, Trachlight, Shikani, and Bullard) and discuss their clinical and experimental role in difficult airway management.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Owing to the development of medical technology, there are an increasing number of videolaryngoscopes and other devices facilitating endotracheal intubation in difficult airway scenarios, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation, cervical spine injury, or face-to-face intubation. Each of these devices may bring benefits in the form of increasing the intubation effectiveness, as well as shortening the procedure, provided that the person performing intubation is familiar with the use of the device.

Comparison of Pentax-AWS®, Glidescope®, and King Vision® for difficult-airway intubation in manikins model by paramedics

Introduction:

Prehospital tracheal intubation of a difficult airway is challenging for paramedics. Thus far, the potential role of video laryngoscopes for this purpose has not been confirmed. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the impact of different types of video laryngoscopes on the success rate and time to intubation by paramedics.

Methods:

This is a prospective, randomized, crossover manikin study involving 18 paramedics. Participants performed intubation on a difficult airway in a high-fidelity manikin using Pentax-AWS®, Glidescope®, and King Vision® (with two blade types). Time to intubation and success rate of intubation were determined. Participants also rated the best glottic view and reported their preferences of devices.

Results:

In a difficult-airway scenario, the median time to intubation with Pentax-AWS® was 22.9 s (interquartile range, 19.5–24.9 s), which was significantly shorter than using other devices. There were no significant differences in the time to maximal exposure of the vocal cords between four devices ( p = 0.156). The time to insert the endotracheal tube with Pentax-AWS® and King Vision® with a guide-channel blade was significantly shorter than that with the other two devices (all, p < 0.05). Pentax-AWS® and King Vision® with a guide-channel blade showed higher success rates than the other two devices ( p = 0.04). With regard to device preference, 14 participants preferred Pentax-AWS® among all devices analyzed.

Conclusion:

Pentax-AWS® could be an appropriate device for paramedics in cases of difficult airways, with high success rate.

Comparison of the ETView Single Lumen and Macintosh laryngoscopes for endotracheal intubation in an airway manikin with immobilized cervical spine by novice paramedics: A randomized crossover manikin trial

CONTEXT

Management of the airway of a trauma victim is considered challenging. Various approaches have been described to achieve airway control in this setup; many of them include video-assited viewing of the larynx during intubation. ETView Single Lumen (SL) is a novice single-use endotracheal tube equiped with a video camera and a light source at its distal tip. Its use was previously described in seeral clinical and training setups.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of the VivaSight SL compared with classic direct laryngoscopy performed with a Macintosh blade in a manikin-simulated trauma setup presenting various degrees of airway challenge when performed by inexperienced physicians.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

This was prospective, randomized, crossover, manikin trial. After short training on the ETView system, 67 novice paramedics attempted to perform oral intubation using both standard direct laryngoscopy (MAC group) and the VivaSight SL endotracheal tube (ETView group) in a randomized order on manikins in 3 increasingly more difficult scenarios (simple intubation, cervical spine manual stabilization, and with cervical collar in place).

OUTCOME MEASURE

Overall success rate, time to intubation, number of intubation attempts, laryngeal view grade, dental compression, and overall participant satisfaction were monitored.

RESULTS

Duration of intubation and number of attempts were significantly superior in the ETView group in the latter 2 more challenging scenarios. All other parameters showed superiority to the ETView group in all 3 scenarios.

CONCLUSION

The VivaSight SL system performed better in a complex scenario of airway management of a trauma victim in need for cervical spine stabilization performed by novice caregivers compared to standard direct laryngoscopy and should be considered in this clinical setup.

Ability of paramedics to perform endotracheal intubation during continuous chest compressions: a randomized cadaver study comparing Pentax AWS and Macintosh laryngoscopes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the trial was to compare the time parameters for intubation with the use of the Macintosh (MAC) laryngoscope and Pentax AWS-S100 videolaryngoscope (AWS; Pentax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) with and without chest compression (CC) by paramedics during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a cadaver model.

METHODS

This was a randomized crossover cadaver trial. Thirty-five paramedics with no experience in videolaryngoscopy participated in the study. They performed intubation in two emergency scenarios: scenario A, normal airway without CC; scenario B, normal airway with continuous CC.

RESULTS

The median time to first ventilation with the use of the AWS and the MAC was similar in scenario A: 25 (IQR, 22-27) seconds vs. 24 (IQR, 22.5-26) seconds (P=.072). A statistically significant difference in TTFV between AWS and MAC was noticed in scenario B (P=.011). In scenario A, the first endotracheal intubation (ETI) attempt success rate was achieved in 97.1% with AWS compared with 94.3% with MAC (P=.43). In scenario B, the success rate after the first ETI attempt with the use of the different intubation methods varied and amounted to 88.6% vs. 77.1% for AWS and MAC, respectively (P=.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The Pentax AWS offered a superior glottic view as compared with the MAC laryngoscope, which was associated with a higher intubation rate and a shorter intubation time during an uninterrupted CC scenario. However, in the scenario without CC, the results for AWS and MAC were comparable.