Comparison of Pentax-AWS Airwayscope and Glidescope for Infant Tracheal Intubation by Anesthesiologists during Cardiopulmonary Arrest Simulation: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Difficult Airway Management in Neonates and Infants: Knowledge of Devices and a Device-Oriented Strategy

Difficult airway management (DAM) in neonates and infants requires anesthesiologists and critical care clinicians to respond rapidly with appropriate evaluation of specific situations. Therefore, organizing information regarding DAM devices and device-oriented guidance for neonate and infant DAM treatment will help practitioners select the safest and most effective strategy. Based on DAM device information and reported literature, there are three modern options for DAM in neonates and infants that can be selected according to the anatomical difficulty and device-oriented strategy: (1) video laryngoscope (VLS), (2) supraglottic airway device (SAD), and (3) flexible fiberoptic scope (FOS). Some VLSs are equipped with small blades for infants. Advanced SADs have small sizes for infants, and some effectively function as conduits for endotracheal intubation. The smallest FOS has an outer diameter of 2.2 mm and enables intubation with endotracheal tubes with an inner diameter of 3.0 mm. DAM in neonates and infants can be improved by effectively selecting the appropriate device combination and ensuring that available providers have the necessary skills.

Evaluation of gum-elastic bougie combined with direct and indirect laryngoscopes in vomitus setting: A randomized simulation trial

PURPOSE

Videolaryngoscopes may not be useful in the presence of vomitus due to blurred images on the monitor. The objective of our study is to compare the utility of gum-elastic bougie (GEB) application for tracheal intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope (McL), which is a direct laryngoscope, with that of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope® (AWS) and McGRATH® MAC (McGRATH) in simulated vomitus settings.

METHODS

Sixteen novice doctors performed tracheal intubation on an adult manikin using McL, AWS, and McGRATH with or without GEB under normal and vomitus simulations.

RESULTS

In the normal setting the tracheal intubation was successful with the three laryngoscopes regardless of GEB application. In the vomitus setting, the intubation success rate did not significantly improve using McL, while it did using McGRATH or AWS. In the normal settings, GEB application significantly lengthened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. By contrast, in the vomitus settings, GEB application significantly shortened the intubation time in all three laryngoscopes. For the comparison of three laryngoscopes, the intubation time did not differ significantly in normal setting, while it was significantly longer in McG and AWS trials than McL trial.

CONCLUSION

The GEB application facilitates the tracheal intubation in the vomitus setting using McGRATH and AWS in adult simulation.

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.

Gum-Elastic Bougie Efficacy for Tracheal Intubation During Continuous Chest Compression in Infants-A Crossover Simulation Trial

BACKGROUND

Recent guidelines for infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation emphasize that all rescuers should minimize interruption of chest compression, even for endotracheal intubation.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the utility of application of a gum-elastic bougie (GEB) plus Miller laryngoscope (Mil) with the Mil alone during chest compression on an infant mannequin.

METHODS

Sixteen anesthesiologists with more than 2 years of experience performed tracheal intubation on an infant mannequin using the Mil or Mil plus 6Fr GEB, with or without chest compression. Intubation success rate, intubation time, and subjective difficulty scores of laryngoscopy and tube passage through the glottis were measured.

RESULTS

In Mil trials, none of the participants failed without compression, whereas four failed with compression (p = 0.03). In Mil-plus-GEB trials, all participants succeeded regardless of chest compression. Intubation time was significantly longer with chest compression in both Mil and Mil-plus-GEB trials (p < 0.001). The intubation time during chest compression was significantly longer in Mil than in Mil-plus-GEB trials (p < 0.001). Difficulty of operation on a visual analog scale (VAS) for laryngoscopy did not significantly differ between Mil and Mil-plus-GEB trials during chest compression, whereas the VAS for tube passage through the glottis was significantly higher in Mil than in Mil-plus-GEB trials.

CONCLUSIONS

GEB use shortened the intubation time and improved the success rate of infant tracheal intubation during chest compression by anesthesiologists in simulations.

Comparison of Miller and Airtraq laryngoscopes for orotracheal intubation by physicians wearing CBRN protective equipment during infant resuscitation: a randomized crossover simulation study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of orotracheal intubation with the Miller laryngoscope compared with the Airtraq laryngoscope by emergency and pediatric physicians wearing CBRN-PPE type III on infant manikins with conventional airway. We hypothesized that in this situation, the orotracheal intubation with the Airtraq laryngoscope would be faster and more effective than with the Miller laryngoscope.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center study who recruited emergency department physicians on a voluntary basis. Each physician performed a total of 20 intubation trials while in CBRN-PPE with the two intubation techniques, Miller and Airtraq. Intubations by each airway device were tested over ten consecutive runs. The order of use of one or the other devices was randomized with a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint was overall orotracheal intubation success.

RESULTS

Fifty-five emergency and pediatric physicians were assessed for eligibility. Forty-one physicians were included in this study and 820 orotracheal intubation attempts were performed. The orotracheal intubation success rate with the Airtraq laryngoscope was higher than with the Miller (99% vs. 92%; p-adjusted <.001). The orotracheal intubation and glottis visualization times decreased with the number of attempts (p <.001). The median orotracheal intubation time with the Airtraq laryngoscope was lower than with the Miller laryngoscope (15 s vs. 20 s; p-adjusted <.001). The median glottis visualization time with the Airtraq laryngoscope and with the Miller laryngoscope were not different (6.0 s vs. 7.5 s; p-adjusted =.237). Thirty-four (83 %) physicians preferred the Airtraq laryngoscope versus 6 (15 %) for the Miller (p-adjusted <.001).

DISCUSSION

For tracheal intubation by physicians wearing CBRN-PPE during infant resuscitation simulation, we showed that the orotracheal intubation success rate with the Airtraq laryngoscope was higher than with the Miller laryngoscope and that orotracheal intubation time with the Airtraq laryngoscope was lower than with the Miller laryngoscope.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems useful to train the physicians in emergency departments in the use of pediatric Airtraq and for the management of CBRN risks.