The AirView Study: Comparison of Intubation Conditions and Ease between the Airtraq-AirView and the King Vision

Smartphone-Based Device in Exotic Pet Medicine

This article reviews the use of the smartphone in exotic pet medicine. The mobile app is the most instinctive use of the smartphone; however, there are very limited software dedicated to the exotic pet specifically. With an adapter, the smartphone can be attached to a regular endoscope and acts as a small endoscopic unit. Additional devices, such as infrared thermography or ultrasound, can be connected to the smartphone through the micro-USB port. The medical use of the smartphone is still in its infancy in veterinary medicine but can bring several solutions to the exotic pet practitioner and improve point-of-care evaluation.

Comparison of King Vision video laryngoscope (channeled blade) with Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation using armored endotracheal tubes

Background and Aims

During direct laryngoscopy (DL), intubation using armored endotracheal tubes (ETTs) requires help of bougies, stylets, or Magill's forceps, which leads to unnecessary prolongation in the intubation times. The channeled blade of King Vision (KV) video laryngoscope is likely to obviate the need of these equipments for a successful intubation using armored tubes.

Material and Methods

After approval from Institutional Ethics Committee and informed consent, 100 patients were randomized to receive endotracheal intubation using armored ETTs either with KV video laryngoscope (VL) channeled blade or with Macintosh laryngoscope. Time to intubation, success rate, time for best glottis view, number of attempts, optimization maneuvers, or complications if any were recorded. Ease of device use was also assessed in terms of insertion, glottis visualization, and intubation. Continuous variables were tested using unpaired t-test and categorical variables with Pearson's Chi-square test. P ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.

Result

First attempt success rate was 92% in group KV and 74% in group DL (P = 0.017). Time for successful intubation was less in group KV as compared with group DL (P < 0.0001). Optimization maneuvers such as "BURP" was needed in three patients of group KV and 11 patients of group DL (P = 0.0218). Bougie was needed in 13 patients of group DL and none from group KV (P = <0.001). Ease of device use was similar in the two groups.

Conclusion

KVVL offers faster intubating conditions for tracheal intubation requiring armored ETTs in comparison to DL using Macintosh blade.

A Prospective Crossover Study Evaluating the Efficacy of King Vision Video Laryngoscope in Patients Requiring General Anesthesia with Endotracheal Intubation

Background:

Direct laryngoscopy used for tracheal intubation requires aligning the pharyngeal, laryngeal and oral axes to achieve a line of sight. Video laryngoscopy provides a better view of the glottis without the need for aligning the three axes.

Aims:

To evaluate the effectiveness of King vision laryngoscope over Macintosh laryngoscope in visualizing the glottis and intubating the trachea, when used on a same patient as in a cross over manner.

Settings and Design:

Department of Anaesthesia, Mediciti Institute of Medical Sciences, prospective crossover study conducted over a period of six months.

Subjects and Methods:

Sixty adult patients belonging to ASA physical status class I-II, requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to intubation by King vision or Macintosh laryngoscope. Improvement, if any, in the Cormack-Lehane grading using the King vision scope, following initial grading with the Macintosh blade in the same patient was analyzed.

Statistical Analysis:

Mean and Standard deviation were calculated for different parameters under the study. Where appropriate, results were analyzed using the Mc Nemar χ2 test. A ‘p’ value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

In the King Vision group, Cormack and Lehane grade improved in the majority (9/12) of patients in whom the initial Cormack and Lehane grade was >1 using the Macintosh blade.

Conclusions:

The use of the King vision blade significantly improved the laryngoscopic view over the Macintosh blade but the time for intubation was prolonged.

Comparison of King Vision video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Background and objectives

We compared the efficiency of the King Vision video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope, when used by experienced anesthesiologists on adult patients with varying intubating conditions, in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

Methods

A total of 388 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II, scheduled for general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Each patient was intubated with both laryngoscopes successively, in a randomized order. Intubation success rate, time to best glottic view, time to intubation, time to ventilation, Cormack–Lehane laryngoscopy grades, and complications related to the laryngoscopy and intubation were analyzed.

Results and conclusions

First pass intubation success rates were similar for the King Vision and the Macintosh (96.6% vs. 94.3%, respectively, p > 0.05). King Vision resulted in a longer average time to glottic view (95% CI 0.5–1.4 s, p < 0.001), and time to intubation (95% CI 3–4.6 s, p < 0.001). The difference in time to intubation was similar when unsuccessful intubation attempts were excluded (95% CI 2.8–4.4 s, p < 0.001). Based on the modified Mallampati class at the preoperative visit, the King Vision improved the glottic view in significantly more patients (220 patients, 56.7%) compared with the Macintosh (180 patients, 46.4%) (p < 0.001). None of the patients had peripheral oxygen desaturation below 94%. Experienced anesthesiologists may obtain similar rates of first pass intubation success and airway trauma with both laryngoscopes. King Vision requires longer times to visualize the glottis and to intubate the trachea, but does not cause additional desaturation.

[Comparison of King Vision video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We compared the efficiency of the King Vision video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope, when used by experienced anesthesiologists on adult patients with varying intubating conditions, in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 388 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II, scheduled for general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Each patient was intubated with both laryngoscopes successively, in a randomized order. Intubation success rate, time to best glottic view, time to intubation, time to ventilation, Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopy grades, and complications related to the laryngoscopy and intubation were analyzed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

First pass intubation success rates were similar for the King Vision and the Macintosh (96.6% vs. 94.3%, respectively, p>0.05). King Vision resulted in a longer average time to glottic view (95% CI 0.5-1.4s, p<0.001), and time to intubation (95% CI 3-4.6s, p<0.001). The difference in time to intubation was similar when unsuccessful intubation attempts were excluded (95% CI 2.8-4.4s, p<0.001). Based on the modified Mallampati class at the preoperative visit, the King Vision improved the glottic view in significantly more patients (220 patients, 56.7%) compared with the Macintosh (180 patients, 46.4%) (p<0.001). None of the patients had peripheral oxygen desaturation below 94%. Experienced anesthesiologists may obtain similar rates of first pass intubation success and airway trauma with both laryngoscopes. King Vision requires longer times to visualize the glottis and to intubate the trachea, but does not cause additional desaturation.