Evaluation of intubation and intensive care use of the new Ambu® aScope™ 4 broncho and Ambu® aView™ compared to a customary flexible endoscope a multicentre prospective, non-interventional study

Single-use vs. reusable flexible bronchoscopes for airway management and in critical care: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Flexible bronchoscopes have become essential in the operating theatre environment and in critical care. This narrative review compared single-use and reusable flexible bronchoscopes with a focus on safety, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases for studies related to flexible bronchoscopes for airway management or use in critical care. Human or animal studies of any design assessing single-use and reusable flexible bronchoscopes were included and qualitatively synthesised. We also searched manufacturer websites for relevant data.

RESULTS

We included 52 studies and data from six manufacturer websites. There was mixed evidence for safety, and data on usability also showed significant heterogeneity, with different parameters, manufacturers and models examined. Neither single-use nor reusable flexible bronchoscopes appeared convincingly superior to the other for safety or usability. Cost analyses showed that the rate of use of flexible bronchoscopes per year, along with several other factors, affects cost-effectiveness for each institution, though the risk of cross-contamination is an advantage of single-use devices. However, sufficient evidence on the rate of bronchoscopy-induced infection in the operating theatre and critical care environment is lacking. Due to the risk of cross-contamination, single-use flexible bronchoscopes must be sterilised or incinerated after use, and completely recyclable single-use models are not currently available.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is required on safety, usability and life cycle assessment in the operating theatre and critical care environment, as well as on the rate of bronchoscopy-induced infection. Future comparative studies, including new manufacturers and designs, may lend further insights.

A Novel Articulating Chip-on-Tip Endoscope for Dynamic Middle Ear Surgical Visualization

OBJECTIVE

To enhance visualization in pediatric Otolaryngology middle ear surgeries and reduce mastoidectomy instances, we introduce a novel Articulating Chip-on-Tip Endoscope (ACoT Endo).

METHODS

The ACoT Endo incorporates a cable-driven distal end camera and off-the-shelf Chip-on-Tip camera to improve visualization. We compared its capabilities with standard endoscopes, evaluating its bending capacity (70 ° ± 2 °) and center axis rotation (360 °). To test the overall functionality of this device, a Mock Ear was created to simulate the anatomy of the human ear, and the ACoT Endo's ability to be used in this cavity is compared to a standard 0 ° Karl Storz endoscope through tests with the Mock Ear and respective endoscopes.

RESULTS

The ACoT Endo accurately captured surgical details similar to standard endoscopes in the ENT field. Compared to the 0 ° Karl Storz endoscope, the ACoT Endo demonstrated an increased field of view by approximately 69% and captured area by approximately 249%. ACot Endo allowed the surgeon to effortlessly articulate the camera with the rotation of a finger, while an excision tool was inserted in the middle ear, a procedure that is currently extremely difficult with standard endoscopes.

CONCLUSION

The ACoT Endo's dynamic viewing angle and Chip-on-Tip camera enable unparalleled surgical visualization within the middle ear using a single endoscope, offering potential benefits in Otolaryngology procedures.

SIGNIFICANCE

By reducing the need for invasive mastoidectomies and providing better visualization tools, the ACoT Endo has significant potential to improve outcomes and safety in pediatric middle ear surgeries.

The Cost of Flexible Bronchoscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Until 2009, only reusable bronchoscopes were marketed, but the introduction and widespread adoption of single-use flexible bronchoscopes (SFBs) as an emerging technology has since accelerated. Several studies have described the costs of reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFBs) and SFBs. This meta-analysis aimed to compile the current published evidence to analyse the cost of different scenarios using RFBs and SFBs.

METHODS

All published literature describing the cost of RFBs or SFBs was identified by searching PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar, limited to those between 1 January, 2009 and 6 November, 2020. Included studies should report the total cost of RFBs. Continuous data were extracted for relevant outcomes and analysed using RStudio^® 4.0.3 as the standardised mean difference and standard error of the mean in a mixed-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed based on the reporting quality.

RESULTS

In the systematic literature review, 342 studies were initially identified, and 11 were included in the final analysis. The mean RFB procedure cost was $266 (standard error of the mean: 34), including capital investments, repairs and reprocessing costs of $91, $92 and $83, respectively. The mean SFB procedure cost was $289 (standard error of the mean: 10). The incremental cost was $23 (standard error of the mean: 33) and was not significant (p = 0.46). Because of the economy of scale, RFB is more likely to be cost minimising compared with SFB when performing 306 or 39 procedures per site or RFB, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we found no significant difference in the cost of use between RFBs and SFBs and a high risk of bias.

Evaluation of a new developed disposable and portable bronchoscopy system

Background

Bronchoscopy is critical in the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and its use is associated with the challenges of stringent sterilization and virus transmission risk. We developed a disposable and portable bronchoscope (YunSendo-R) and compared its safety and function with those of current reusable and single-use bronchoscopes using an animal model.

Methods

We compared the YunSendo-R system with a commercially available reusable bronchoscope (Olympus, BF-H290) and single-use bronchoscope (Ambu, Ambu® aScope3™). Eight physicians used the three types of bronchoscopes to operate on Guangxi Bama mini pigs. Each operator performed bronchoscopy and completed a 10-point Likert scale questionnaire for evaluating visual ability and manoeuvrability. Operation time and scores were collected.

Results

Operation time had no significant differences among the three bronchoscopes. In visual ability, the YunSendo-R bronchoscope showed superior performance to the Ambu bronchoscope in image clarity, colour contrast, and illumination (P < 0.05) and no significant difference in performance compared with the Olympus bronchoscope (P > 0.05). The YunSendo-R bronchoscope had similar manoeuvrability to the Olympus bronchoscope and better scope tip flexibility than the Ambu bronchoscope (P > 0.05). No relevant complications were reported.

Conclusion

We have developed a new bronchoscopy system with the advantages of disposability and portability, which was effective and safe in an animal model. It has better visual ability than the Ambu bronchoscope and similar visual ability and manoeuvrability to the Olympus bronchoscope. The YunSendo-R bronchoscope is a promising device for clinical practice, especially in reusable-endoscope-transmitted infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

Single-Use and Reusable Flexible Bronchoscopes in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine

Flexible bronchoscopy plays a critical role in both diagnostic and therapeutic management of a variety of pulmonary disorders in the bronchoscopy suite and the intensive care unit. In the set-ting of the ongoing viral pandemic, single-use flexible bronchoscopes (SUFB) have garnered attention as various professional pulmonary societies have released guidelines regarding uses for SUFB given the concern for risk of viral transmission when using reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB). In addition to offering sterility, SUFBs are portable, easily accessible, and may be more cost-effective than RFB when considering the potential costs of treating bronchoscopy-related infections. Furthermore, since SUFBs are one time use, they do not require reprocessing after use, and therefore may translate to reduced cleaning and storage costs. Despite these advantages, RFBs are still routinely used to perform advanced diagnostic and therapeutic bronchoscopic procedures given the need for optimal maneuverability, handling, angle of deflection, image quality, and larger channel size for passing of ancillary instruments. Here, we review the published evidence on the applications of single-use and reusable bronchoscopes in bronchoscopy suites and intensive care units. Specifically, we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these devices as pertinent to fundamental, advanced, and therapeutic bronchoscopic interventions.

Optical Devices in Tracheal Intubation-State of the Art in 2020

The review article is focused on developments in optical devices, other than laryngoscopes, in airway management and tracheal intubation. It brings information on advantages and limitations in their use, compares different devices, and summarizes benefits in various clinical settings. Supraglottic airway devices may be used as a conduit for fiberscope-guided tracheal intubation mainly as a rescue plan in the scenario of difficult or failed laryngoscopy. Some of these devices offer the possibility of direct endotracheal tube placement. Hybrid devices combine the features of two different intubating tools. Rigid and semi-rigid optical stylets represent another option in airway management. They offer benefits in restricted mouth opening and may be used also for retromolar intubation. Awake flexible fiberoptic intubation has been a gold standard in predicted difficult laryngoscopy for decades. Modern flexible bronchoscopes used in anesthesia and intensive care are disposable devices and contain optical lenses instead of fibers. Endotracheal tubes with an incorporated optics are used mainly in thoracic anesthesia for lung separation. They are available in double-lumen and single-lumen versions. They offer a benefit of direct view to the carina and do not require flexible fiberscope for their correct placement.