The importance of prospective observational studies in airway management: yet only the first step

Predictive and protective factors for failing first pass intubation in prehospital rapid sequence intubation: an aetiology and risk systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prehospital rapid sequence intubation first pass success rates vary between 59% and 98%. Patient morbidity is associated with repeat intubation attempts. Understanding what influences first pass success can guide improvements in practice. We performed an aetiology and risk systematic review to answer the research question 'what factors are associated with success or failure at first attempt laryngoscopy in prehospital rapid sequence intubation?'.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched on March 3, 2023 for studies examining first pass success rates for rapid sequence intubation of prehospital live patients. Screening was performed via Covidence, and data synthesised by meta-analysis. The review was registered with PROSPERO and performed and reported as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Reasonable evidence was discovered for predictive and protective factors for failure of first pass intubation. Predictive factors included age younger than 1 yr, the presence of blood or fluid in the airway, restricted jaw or neck movement, trauma patients, nighttime procedures, chronic or acute distortions of normal face/upper airway anatomy, and equipment issues. Protective factors included an experienced intubator, adequate training, use of certain videolaryngoscopes, elevating the patient on a stretcher in an inclined position, use of a bougie, and laryngeal manoeuvres.

CONCLUSIONS

Managing bloody airways, positioning well, using videolaryngoscopes with bougies, and appropriate training should be further explored as opportunities for prehospital services to increase first pass success. Heterogeneity of studies limits stronger conclusions.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

PROSPERO (CRD42022353609).

New guidelines for research in airway device evaluation: time for an updated approach (ADEPT-2) to the Difficult Airway Society's 'ADEPT' strategy?

In this article we present the learning from a clinical study of airway device evaluation, conducted under the framework of the Difficult Airway Society (DAS, UK) 'ADEPT' (airway device evaluation project team) strategy. We recommend a change in emphasis from small scale randomised controlled trials conducted as research, to larger-scale observational, post-marketing evaluation audits as a way of obtaining more meaningful information.

Prospective Observational Trial of a Nonocclusive Dilatation Balloon in the Management of Tracheal Stenosis

OBJECTIVES

Tracheal stenosis is a debilitating condition that often presents as an emergency and is challenging to treat. Dilatation may avoid tracheostomy or costly tracheal resection and reconstruction. Traditional dilators cause complete occlusion, preventing oxygenation and ventilation, limiting the safe duration of dilatation, and increasing the risk of hypoxic injury or barotrauma. The study authors here assessed an innovative nonocclusive tracheal dilatation balloon, which may improve patient safety by allowing continuous gas exchange.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study of 20 discrete dilatation procedures performed in 13 patients under general anesthesia. The primary outcomes were the ability to ventilate during dilatation and the preservation of peripheral oxygen saturation. Secondary outcomes included a measured reduction in stenosis, improvement in Cotton-Myer grading, and procedure-related adverse events.

SETTING

At a single university (academic) hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Consenting adult patients with acquired tracheal stenosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Access to the airway was maintained by a rigid bronchoscope or supraglottic airway device, as deemed appropriate. Continuous conventional ventilation was provided during 3-minute balloon dilatations.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Heart rate, airway pressure, end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure, and peripheral oxygen saturation were measured, and adverse events were recorded. Ventilation was satisfactory in all patients. Peripheral saturation remained greater than 94% in 19 of the 20 (95%) procedures. Stenosis internal diameter and grading were improved. Two patients had minor reversible adverse events (coughing and laryngospasm), which did not prevent completion of the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors report the first human trial of the device, in which continuous conventional ventilation could be provided during all tracheal balloon dilatation procedures. Larger trials are needed to confirm improved patient safety and comparative efficacy.

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

Tracheal intubation is a common procedure performed to secure the airway in adults undergoing surgery or those who are critically ill. Intubation is sometimes associated with difficulties and complications that may result in patient harm. While it is traditionally achieved by performing direct laryngoscopy, the past three decades have seen the advent of rigid indirect videolaryngoscopes (VLs). A mounting body of evidence comparing the two approaches to tracheal intubation has been acquired over this period of time. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether use of different designs of VLs in adults requiring tracheal intubation reduces the failure rate compared with direct laryngoscopy, and assess the benefits and risks of these devices in selected population groups, users and settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and Web of Science on 27 February 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and conducted forward and backward citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with adults undergoing laryngoscopy performed with either a VL or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in any clinical setting. We included parallel and cross-over study designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for the following outcomes: failed intubation, hypoxaemia, successful first attempt at tracheal intubation, oesophageal intubation, dental trauma, Cormack-Lehane grade, and time for tracheal intubation.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 222 studies (219 RCTs, three quasi-RCTs) with 26,149 participants undergoing tracheal intubation. Most studies recruited adults undergoing elective surgery requiring tracheal intubation. Twenty-one studies recruited participants with a known or predicted difficult airway, and an additional 25 studies simulated a difficult airway. Twenty-one studies were conducted outside the operating theatre environment; of these, six were in the prehospital setting, seven in the emergency department and eight in the intensive care unit.  We report here the findings of the three main comparisons according to videolaryngoscopy device type. We downgraded the certainty of the outcomes for imprecision, study limitations (e.g. high or unclear risks of bias), inconsistency when we noted substantial levels of statistical heterogeneity and publication bias. Macintosh-style videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (61 studies, 9883 participants) We found moderate-certainty evidence that a Macintosh-style VL probably reduces rates of failed intubation (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.65; 41 studies, 4615 participants) and hypoxaemia (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99; 16 studies, 2127 participants). These devices may also increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09; 42 studies, 7311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably improve glottic view when assessed as Cormack-Lehane grade 3 and 4 (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.48; 38 studies, 4368 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little or no clear difference in rates of oesophageal intubation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.21; 14 studies, 2404 participants) but this finding was supported by low-certainty evidence. We were unsure of the findings for dental trauma because the certainty of this evidence was very low (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.89; 18 studies, 2297 participants). We were not able to pool data for time required for tracheal intubation owing to considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 96%). Hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (96 studies, 11,438 participants) We found moderate-certainty evidence that hyperangulated VLs probably reduce rates of failed intubation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; 63 studies, 7146 participants) and oesophageal intubation (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.81; 14 studies, 1968 participants). In subgroup analysis, we noted that hyperangulated VLs were more likely to reduce failed intubation when used on known or predicted difficult airways (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.48; P = 0.03 for subgroup differences; 15 studies, 1520 participants). We also found that these devices may increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.05; 66 studies, 8086 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the glottic view is probably also improved (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.24; 54 studies, 6058 participants; data for Cormack-Lehane grade 3/4 views; moderate-certainty evidence). However, we found low-certainty evidence of little or no clear difference in rates of hypoxaemia (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.11; 15 studies, 1691 participants), and the findings for dental trauma were unclear because the certainty of this evidence was very low (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.59; 30 studies, 3497 participants). We were not able to pool data for time required for tracheal intubation owing to considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). Channelled videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (73 studies, 7165 participants) We found moderate-certainty evidence that channelled VLs probably reduce rates of failed intubation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.61; 53 studies, 5367 participants) and hypoxaemia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.50; 15 studies, 1966 participants). They may also increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.15; 47 studies, 5210 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and probably improve glottic view (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.21; 40 studies, 3955 participants; data for Cormack-Lehane grade 3/4 views; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little or no clear difference in rates of oesophageal intubation (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.75; 16 studies, 1756 participants) but this was supported by low-certainty evidence. We were unsure of the findings for dental trauma because the certainty of the evidence was very low (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.12; 29 studies, 2375 participants). We were not able to pool data for time required for tracheal intubation owing to considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 98%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

VLs of all designs likely reduce rates of failed intubation and result in higher rates of successful intubation on the first attempt with improved glottic views. Macintosh-style and channelled VLs likely reduce rates of hypoxaemic events, while hyperangulated VLs probably reduce rates of oesophageal intubation. We conclude that videolaryngoscopy likely provides a safer risk profile compared to direct laryngoscopy for all adults undergoing tracheal intubation.