Utilisation d’un vidéolaryncoscope pour une intubation difficile en chirurgie thoracique

[Comparison between the Airtraq, X-Lite, and direct laryngoscopes for thyroid surgery: a randomized clinical trial]

PURPOSE

To compare the performance of the Airtraq, X-Lite, and direct laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation for elective thyroid surgery.

METHODS

In this randomized prospective study, Patients who were ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) I or II physical status I or II and patients undergoing thyroid surgery were included in this randomized prospective study. Patients with attributes for difficult intubation criteria were excluded. After induction of anesthesia with fentanyl, propofol, and cisatracurium, patients were randomized into three groups according to the intubating device used: Airtraq laryngoscope (Airtraq), X-Lite video laryngoscope (X-lLite), and direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh blade (Direct). The primary outcome measurement was the time needed for tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included intubation difficulty score (IDS), Cormack-Lehane classification, as well as hemodynamic and respiratory effects.

RESULTS

One hundred and five patients were included. Mean (standard deviation) time for intubation was 28.2 (2.1) sec in the Airtraq group vs 36.6 (3.7) sec in the X-Lite group (P < 0.001), and 41.1 (4.4) sec in the Direct group (P < 0.001). Compared with to the direct laryngoscope, the Airtraq provided better visualization of the glottis (P = 0.003) with fewer attempts (P < 0.001) and lower IDS (P < 0.001). The intubation difficulty score was lower with the Airtraq than with the X-Lite (P = 0.003). Patients in the X-Lite and Direct groups showed more hemodynamic variations than those in the Airtraq group. There was only one failed intubation, in the direct group.

CONCLUSION

In thyroid surgery, the Airtraq and X-Lite laryngoscopes decrease time to intubation when compared with direct laryngoscopy.

[Faster double-lumen tube intubation with the videolaryngoscope than with a standard laryngoscope]

PURPOSE

This study was designed to compare videolaryngoscopy with direct laryngoscopy with respect to ease of intubation when inserting a double lumen tube (DLT).

METHODS

In this prospective randomized study 68 patients American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II were included. Patients with criteria indicating possible difficult intubation were excluded. The patients were randomized into two groups, depending on the tool used to facilitate intubation: videolaryngoscope (VL group) or direct laryngoscopy (DL group). The time required for intubation was the primary endpoint. Cormack and Lehane glottic visualization (CL) scores, the need for external laryngeal maneuvers and the number of attempts were measured.

RESULTS

Glottic visualization was better in the VL group than in the DL group. The CL scores were I, II and III in 24, eight and two patients, respectively, in the VL group compared with 13, 11 and eight in the DL group (P = 0.025). Patients in the VL group required fewer attempts than the DL group (P = 0.019). Intubation time was 39.9 ± 4.4 sec in the VL group and 47.9 ± 5.4 sec in the DL group (P < 0.001). No intubation failure was noted in group VL compared with two in the DL group (not significant).

CONCLUSION

The use of a videolaryngoscope reduces the time required for intubation with a DLT compared with the direct laryngoscopy in elective thoracic surgery.