A Comparison of the GlideScope® with the Macintosh Laryngoscope for Tracheal Intubation in Patients with Simulated Difficult Airway

Recommendations from the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) for difficult airway management in pediatric care

Difficult airway management in pediatrics during anesthesia represents a major challenge, requiring a careful approach, advanced technical expertise, and accurate protocols. The task force of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) presents a report containing updated recommendations for the management of difficult airways in children and neonates. These recommendations have been developed based on the consensus of a panel of experts, with the objective of offering strategies to overcome challenges during airway management in pediatric patients. Grounded in evidence published in international guidelines and expert opinions, the report highlights crucial steps for the appropriate management of difficult airways in pediatrics, encompassing assessment, preparation, positioning, pre-oxygenation, minimizing trauma, and, paramountly, the maintenance of arterial oxygenation. The report also delves into additional strategies involving the use of advanced tools, such as video laryngoscopy, flexible intubating bronchoscopy, and supraglottic devices. Emphasis is placed on the simplicity of implementing the outlined recommendations, with a focus on the significance of continuous education, training through realistic simulations, and familiarity with the latest available technologies. These practices are deemed essential to ensure procedural safety and contribute to the enhancement of anesthesia outcomes in pediatrics.

Comparison of Time to Intubation of a Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Utilizing C-MAC® Versus GlideScope® Versus Macintosh Blade: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study

BACKGROUND

Macintosh blade direct laryngoscopy is widely used for endotracheal intubation. It may, however, provide an incomplete view of the glottis in patients with challenging airway anatomy. Consequently, various video laryngoscopes have been developed to enhance the visualization of the glottis and facilitate intubation. Yet, the effectiveness of these video laryngoscopes for intubation using a double-lumen endotracheal tube (DLT), which is longer, larger, and more rigid and has a linear configuration as opposed to the naturally semicircular curvature of a single-lumen endotracheal tube, remains uncertain. We hypothesized that video laryngoscopes would be more efficient for DLT intubation compared to the Macintosh blade in an adult manikin.

METHODS

Ninety-four anesthesia providers, comprising 67 residents, 15 fellows, and 12 attendings, attempted to intubate an adult manikin with normal airway anatomy (Laerdal, Wappingers Falls, NY, USA) using a 37 Fr left-sided DLT. Three different intubation devices were used: the C-MAC® video laryngoscope (Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG, Tuttlingen, Germany), the GlideScope® video laryngoscope (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA), and the Macintosh blade direct laryngoscope-were used. Each participant intubated a manikin once with each of the three devices. Participants were randomized via a crossover design with the order of devices determined by using a Latin square design. Time to intubation and the number of failed intubations (esophageal intubation) were compared across the three different devices.

RESULTS

Mean times to intubation for the C-MAC®, GlideScope®, and Macintosh blades were 18.57 ± 0.77, 36.26 ± 2.69, and 20.76 ± 0.96 seconds, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference (P<0.001) between the GlideScope® and the other two laryngoscopes. The times for C-MAC® and Macintosh blades were not significantly different. There were two instances of first-attempt failed intubation with the Macintosh.

CONCLUSION

Both the C-MAC® and the Macintosh blades proved more efficient in terms of time to DLT intubation in the manikin with normal airway anatomy, when compared to the GlideScope®. Considering the occurrence of first-attempt failed intubation, the C-MAC® was the most effective device among the three laryngoscopes for timely successful DLT intubation in the adult manikin. Further studies are needed to confirm these results in human subjects.

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.

Comparisons of Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation Undergoing General Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopes (VLs) for tracheal intubation is still conflicting and changeable according to airway circumstances. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of several VLs in patients undergoing general anesthesia.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched until 13 January 2020. The following VLs were evaluated compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL) by network meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials (RCTs): Airtraq, Airwayscope, C-MAC, C-MAC D-blade (CMD), GlideScope, King Vision, and McGrath. Outcome measures were the success and time (speed) of intubation, glottic view, and sore throat (safety).

RESULTS

A total of 9315 patients in 96 RCTs were included. The highest-ranked VLs for first-pass intubation success were CMD (90.6 % in all airway; 92.7% in difficult airway) and King Vision (92% in normal airway). In the rank analysis for secondary outcomes, the following VLs showed the highest efficacy or safety: Airtraq (safety), Airwayscope (speed and view), C-MAC (speed), CMD (safety), and McGrath (view). These VLs, except McGrath, were more effective or safer than MCL in moderate evidence level, whereas there was low certainty of evidence in the intercomparisons of VLs.

CONCLUSIONS

CMD and King Vision could be relatively successful than MCL and other VLs for tracheal intubation under general anesthesia. The comparisons of intubation success between VLs and MCL showed moderate certainty of evidence level, whereas the intercomparisons of VLs showed low certainty evidence.

Comparison of the strength of various disposable videolaryngoscope blades

PURPOSE

Breaking of disposable blades during emergency endotracheal intubation has been reported. Breakage can cause serious injury and foreign body ingestion. We aimed to measure and analyze the strength characteristics of different disposable videolaryngoscope blades with the application of an upward-lifting force.

METHODS

We measured the strength of four disposable videolaryngoscope blades (C-Mac® S Video laryngoscope MAC #3, Glidescope GVL® 3 stat, Pentax AWS® PBlade TL type, and King Vision® aBlade #3) using the fracture test. The strength of 12 samples of each type of disposable videolaryngoscope blade was measured using an Instron 5,966 tensile tester by applying an upward-lifting force.

RESULTS

After the fracture test using C-Mac, Glidescope GVL, Pentax AWS, and King Vision, the number of deformed blades were 0, 12, 3, and 7, respectively, and the number of broken blades were 12, 0, 9, and 5, respectively. The mean (standard deviation) maximum force strengths of Pentax AWS, C-Mac, King Vision, and Glidescope GVL blades were 408.4 (27.4) N, 325.8 (26.5) N, 291.8 (39.3) N, and 262.7 (3.8) N, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians should be aware of the varied strength characteristics of the four types of disposable videolaryngoscope blades when they are used in endotracheal intubation.

Effectiveness of intubation devices in patients with cervical spine immobilisation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cervical spine immobilisation increases the difficulty of tracheal intubation. Many intubation devices have been evaluated in this setting, but their relative performance remains uncertain.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomised trials comparing two or more intubation devices in adults with cervical spine immobilisation. After critical appraisal, a random-effects network meta-analysis was used to pool and compare device performance. The primary outcome was the probability of first-attempt intubation success (first-pass success). For relative performance, the Macintosh direct laryngoscopy blade was chosen as the reference device.

RESULTS

We included 80 trials (8039 subjects) comparing 26 devices. Compared with the Macintosh, McGrath™ (odds ratio [OR]=11.5; 95% credible interval [CrI] 3.19-46.20), C-MAC D Blade™ (OR=7.44; 95% CrI, 1.06-52.50), Airtraq™ (OR=5.43; 95% CrI, 2.15-14.2), King Vision™ (OR=4.54; 95% CrI, 1.28-16.30), and C-MAC™ (OR=4.20; 95% CrI=1.28-15.10) had a greater probability of first-pass success. This was also true for the GlideScope™ when a tube guide was used (OR=3.54; 95% CrI, 1.05-12.50). Only the Airway Scope™ had a better probability of first-pass success compared with the Macintosh when manual-in-line stabilisation (MILS) was used as the immobilisation technique (OR=7.98; 95% CrI, 1.06-73.00).

CONCLUSIONS

For intubation performed with cervical immobilisation, seven devices had a better probability of first-pass success compared with the Macintosh. However, more studies using MILS (rather than a cervical collar or other alternative) are needed, which more accurately represent clinical practice.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019158067 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=158067).

A single-centre, randomised controlled feasibility pilot trial comparing performance of direct laryngoscopy versus videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in surgical patients

Introduction

Most trials comparing effectiveness of laryngoscopy technique use surrogate endpoints. Intubation success is a more appropriate endpoint for comparing effectiveness of techniques or devices. A large pragmatic clinical trial powered for intubation success has not yet been performed.

Methods

We tested the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial to compare the performance of direct laryngoscopy versus videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation. The trial was conducted in the Department of Adult and Emergency Anaesthesia at the Auckland City Hospital, New Zealand. Patients over 18 years who required endotracheal intubation and were not known or predicted to be difficult to bag-mask ventilate were eligible for the study. Patients were excluded if they required rapid sequence induction, fibreoptic intubation or were unable to consent due to language barriers or cognitive impairment.

Patients were permuted block randomised in groups of 8 to either direct laryngoscopy (DL) or videolaryngoscopy (VL) for the technique of endotracheal intubation. Patients were blinded to laryngoscopic technique; the duty anaesthetist, outcome assessors and statistician were unblinded.

Feasibility was assessed on recruitment rate, adherence to group assignment and data completeness. Primary outcome was first-pass success rate, with secondary outcomes of time to intubation (seconds), Intubation Difficulty Score and complication rate.

Results

One hundred and six patients were randomised and 100 patient results were analysed. Completed data from patients randomised to the DL group (n = 49) was compared with those in the VL group (n = 51). Group adherence and data completeness were 100% and 97%, respectively. First-pass success rate was 83.7% in the direct laryngoscopy group and 72.5% in the videolaryngoscopy group (p = 0.18). Median time to intubation was significantly shorter for direct laryngoscopy when compared to videolaryngoscopy (34 s v 43 s, p = 0.038). Complications included mucosal trauma and airway bleeding which are recognised complications of endotracheal intubation.

Conclusion

A large, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing the relative effectiveness of direct laryngoscopy and indirect videolaryngoscopy is feasible.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12615001267549

Comparison of Airway Management during Anaesthesia Using the Laryngeal Mask Airway CTrach™ and Glidescope™

The design of the Laryngeal Mask Airway CTrach™ combines the fibreoptic viewing capability of the Glidescope™ and the ability for ventilation of the Fastrach™. We conducted a prospective randomised trial comparing the intubation characteristics of the CTrach™ and Glidescope™ to investigate the difference in clinical performance for airway management during anaesthesia. One-hundred-and-six patients with normal airways were recruited and randomly assigned to the CTrach™ or Glidescope™ group. A standardised anaesthesia and airway management protocol was used. The time to intubation was significantly shorter for the Glidescope™ compared to the CTrach™ (43±22 vs. 73±36 s, P <0.001). The success rates of intubation within first and three attempts were significantly higher for Glidescope™. There was no apparent difference in complications of device insertion. Our results suggest that during elective management of normal airways, the time to intubation with the Glidescope™ is significantly shorter than the CTrach™. Further studies are required to compare these devices in patients with difficult airways.

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation: a Cochrane Systematic Review

Difficulties with tracheal intubation commonly arise and impact patient safety. This systematic review evaluates whether videolaryngoscopes reduce intubation failure and complications compared with direct laryngoscopy in adults. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and clinicaltrials.gov up to February 2015, and conducted forward and backward citation tracking. We included randomized controlled trials that compared adult patients undergoing laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopy or Macintosh laryngoscopy. We did not primarily intend to compare individual videolaryngoscopes. Sixty-four studies (7044 participants) were included. Moderate quality evidence showed that videolaryngoscopy reduced failed intubations (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.35, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.19-0.65) including in participants with anticipated difficult airways (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.55). There was no evidence of reduction in hypoxia or mortality, but few studies reported these outcomes. Videolaryngoscopes reduced laryngeal/airway trauma (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.96) and hoarseness (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.88). Videolaryngoscopy increased easy laryngeal views (OR 6.77, 95% CI 4.17-10.98) and reduced difficult views (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.13-0.27) and intubation difficulty, typically using an 'intubation difficulty score' (OR 7.13, 95% CI 3.12-16.31). Failed intubations were reduced with experienced operators (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.13-0.75) but not with inexperienced users. We identified no difference in number of first attempts and incidence of sore throat. Heterogeneity around time for intubation data prevented meta-analysis. We found evidence of differential performance between different videolaryngoscope designs. Lack of data prevented analysis of impact of obesity or clinical location on failed intubation rates. Videolaryngoscopes may reduce the number of failed intubations, particularly among patients presenting with a difficult airway. They improve the glottic view and may reduce laryngeal/airway trauma. Currently, no evidence indicates that use of a videolaryngoscope reduces the number of intubation attempts or the incidence of hypoxia or respiratory complications, and no evidence indicates that use of a videolaryngoscope affects time required for intubation.

A prospective randomized controlled study to evaluate and compare GlideScope with Macintosh laryngoscope for ease of endotracheal intubation in adult patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia

Background:

The aim of the study was to compare the ease the intubation using GlideScope video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope in adult patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 200 American Society of Anesthesiologists I–II patients of either sex, in the age group of 18–60 years were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to two groups. We assessed ease of intubation depending on time to tracheal intubation, number of attempts, glottic view (Cormack–Lehane grade [CL grade] and percentage of glottis opening [POGO]) and intubation difficulty score (IDS), hemodynamic variables and any intra- and post-operative adverse events.

Results:

The rate of successful endotracheal intubation (ETI) in both groups was 100% in the first attempt. The time required for successful ETI was 24.89 ± 5.574 in Group G and 20.68 ± 3.637 in Group M (P < 0.001) found to be statistically significant. There was significant improvement in glottic view with GlideScope (as assessed by POGO score 66.71 ± 29.929 and 94.40 ± 10.476 in group G and 75.85 ± 26.969 and 74.20 ± 29.514 Group M and CL grading [P < 0.001]). A comparison of mean IDS between two groups revealed intubation was easier with the use of GlideScope. The hemodynamic response to intubation was significantly lesser with the use of GlideScope when compared with Macintosh laryngoscope. The incidence of adverse events, though minor like superficial lip or tongue bleed, was similar in two groups.

Conclusions:

GlideScope offers superiority over Macintosh laryngoscope in terms of laryngeal views and the difficulty encountered at ETI in an unselected population.

Improved success rates using videolaryngoscopy in unexperienced users: a randomized crossover study in airway manikins

Background

Videolaryngoscopy has been proven to be a safe procedure managing difficult airways in the hands of airway specialists. Information about the success rates in unexperienced users of videolaryngoscopy compared to conventional laryngoscopy is sparse. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate if there might be more success in securing an airway if the unexperienced provider is using a videolaryngoscope in simulated airways in a randomized manikin study. Differences between commonly used videolaryngoscopes were elucidated.

Methods

A standardized hands-on workshop prior to the study was performed. For direct laryngoscopy (DL) we used a Macintosh laryngoscope, whereas for videolaryngoscopy (VL) we used the cMac, the dBlade, and a King Vision videolaryngoscope. Endotracheal intubations in three simulated normal and difficult airways were performed. Main outcome parameters were time to view and time to intubation. Cormack and Lehane (C + L) classification and the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score were evaluated. After every intubation, the participants were asked to review the airway and the device used.

Results

22 participants (14.8 ± 4.0 intubations per year, mostly trauma surgeons) with limited experience in videolaryngoscopy (mean total number of videolaryngoscopy .4 ± .2) were enrolled. We found improved C + L grades with VL in contrast to DL. We saw similar data with respect to the POGO score, where the participants achieved better visibility of the glottis with VL. The hyperangulated blade geometries of videolaryngoscopes provided a better visibility in difficult airways than the standard geometry of the Macintosh-type blade. The subjective performance of the VL devices was better in more difficult airway scenarios.

Conclusions

After a short introduction and hands-on training, a videolaryngoscope seems to be safe and usable by unexperienced providers. We assume a standard geometry laryngoscope is optimal for a patient with normal anatomy, whereas VL device with a hyperangulated blade is ideal for difficult airway situations with limited mouth opening or restricted neck movement.

Video Laryngoscopy Improves Odds of First-Attempt Success at Intubation in the Intensive Care Unit. A Propensity-matched Analysis

RATIONALE

Urgent tracheal intubation is performed frequently in intensive care units and incurs higher risk than when intubation is performed under more controlled circumstances. Video laryngoscopy may improve the chances of successful tracheal intubation on the first attempt; however, existing comparative data on outcomes are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To compare first-attempt success and complication rates during intubation when using video laryngoscopy compared with traditional direct laryngoscopy in a tertiary academic medical intensive care unit.

METHODS

We prospectively collected and analyzed data from a continuous quality improvement database of all intubations in one medical intensive care unit between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014. Propensity matching and multivariable logistic regression were used to reduce the risk of bias and control for confounding.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 809 intubations took place over the study period. Of these, 673 (83.2%) were performed using video laryngoscopy and 136 (16.8%) using direct laryngoscopy. First-attempt success with video laryngoscopy was 80.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 77.2-83.3%) compared with 65.4% (95% CI, 56.8-73.4%) for intubations performed with direct laryngoscopy (P < 0.001). In a propensity-matched analysis, the odds ratio for first-attempt success with video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy was 2.81 (95% CI, 2.27-3.59). The rate of arterial oxygen desaturation events during the first intubation attempt was significantly lower for video laryngoscopy than for direct laryngoscopy (18.3% vs. 25.9%; P = 0.04). The rate of esophageal intubation during any attempt was also significantly lower for video laryngoscopy (2.1% vs. 6.6%; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Video laryngoscopy was associated with significantly improved odds of first-attempt success at tracheal intubation by nonanesthesiologists in a medical intensive care unit. Esophageal intubation and oxygen desaturation occurred less frequently with the use of video laryngoscopy. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

Successful tracheal intubation during general anaesthesia traditionally requires a line of sight to the larynx attained by positioning the head and neck and using a laryngoscope to retract the tongue and soft tissues of the floor of the mouth. Difficulties with intubation commonly arise, and alternative laryngoscopes that use digital and/or fibreoptic technology have been designed to improve visibility when airway difficulty is predicted or encountered. Among these devices, a rigid videolaryngoscope (VLS) uses a blade to retract the soft tissues and transmits a lighted video image to a screen.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess whether use of videolaryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in adults requiring general anaesthesia reduces risks of complications and failure compared with direct laryngoscopy. Our secondary aim was to assess the benefits and risks of these devices in selected population groups, such as adults with obesity and those with a known or predicted difficult airway.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase on 10 February 2015. Our search terms were relevant to the review question and were not limited by outcomes. We carried out clinical trials register searches and forward and backward citation tracking. We reran the search on 12 January 2016; we added potential new studies of interest from the 2016 search to a list of 'Studies awaiting classification', and we will incorporate these studies into the formal review during the review update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized studies with adult patients undergoing laryngoscopy performed with a VLS or a Macintosh laryngoscope in a clinical, emergency or out-of-hospital setting. We included parallel and cross-over study designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data, consulting a third review author to resolve disagreements. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, including assessment of risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 64 studies identified during the 2015 search that enrolled 7044 adult participants and compared a VLS of one or more designs with a Macintosh laryngoscope. We identified 38 studies awaiting classification and seven ongoing studies. Of the 64 included studies, 61 included elective surgical patients, and three were conducted in an emergency setting. Among 48 studies that included participants without a predicted difficult airway, 15 used techniques to simulate a difficult airway. Seven recruited participants with a known or predicted difficult airway, and the remaining studies did not specify or included both predicted and not predicted difficult airways. Only two studies specifically recruited obese participants. It was not possible to blind the intubator to the device, and we noted a high level of inevitable heterogeneity, given the large number of studies.Statistically significantly fewer failed intubations were reported when a VLS was used (Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) odds ratio (OR), random-effects 0.35, 95% confidence Interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.65; 38 studies; 4127 participants), and fewer failed intubations occurred when a VLS was used in participants with an anticipated difficult airway (M-H OR, random-effects 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.55; six studies; 830 participants). We graded the quality of this evidence as moderate on the basis of the GRADE system. Failed intubations were fewer when a VLS was used in participants with a simulated difficult airway (M-H OR, random-effects 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.77; nine studies; 810 participants), but groups with no predicted difficult airway provided no significant results (M-H OR, random-effects 0.61, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.67; 19 studies; 1743 participants).Eight studies reported on hypoxia, and only three of these described any events; results showed no differences between devices for this outcome (M-H OR, random-effects 0.39, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.44; 1319 participants). Similarly, few studies reported on mortality, noting no differences between devices (M-H OR, fixed-effect 1.09, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.82; two studies; 663 participants), and only one study reporting on the occurrence of respiratory complications (78 participants); we graded these three outcomes as very low quality owing to lack of data. We found no statistically significant differences between devices in the proportion of successful first attempts (M-H OR, random-effects 1.27, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.09; 36 studies; 4731 participants) nor in those needing more than one attempt. We graded the quality of this evidence as moderate. Studies reported no statistically significant differences in the incidence of sore throat in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) (M-H OR, random-effects 1.00 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.38); 10 studies; 1548 participants) nor at 24 hours postoperatively (M-H OR random-effects 0.54, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.07; eight studies; 844 participants); we graded the quality of this evidence as moderate. Data combined to include studies of cross-over design revealed statistically significantly fewer laryngeal or airway traumas (M-H OR, random-effects 0.68, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.96; 29 studies; 3110 participants) and fewer incidences of postoperative hoarseness (M-H OR, fixed-effect 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.88; six studies; 527 participants) when a VLS was used. A greater number of laryngoscopies performed with a VLS achieved a view of most of the glottis (M-H OR, random-effects 6.77, 95% CI 4.17 to 10.98; 22 studies; 2240 participants), fewer laryngoscopies performed with a VLS achieved no view of the glottis (M-H OR, random-effects 0.18, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.27; 22 studies; 2240 participants) and the VLS was easier to use (M-H OR, random-effects 7.13, 95% CI 3.12 to 16.31; seven studies; 568 participants).Although a large number of studies reported time required for tracheal intubation (55 studies; 6249 participants), we did not present an effects estimate for this outcome owing to the extremely high level of statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 96%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Videolaryngoscopes may reduce the number of failed intubations, particularly among patients presenting with a difficult airway. They improve the glottic view and may reduce laryngeal/airway trauma. Currently, no evidence indicates that use of a VLS reduces the number of intubation attempts or the incidence of hypoxia or respiratory complications, and no evidence indicates that use of a VLS affects time required for intubation.

Comparison of GlideScope video laryngoscopy and Macintosh laryngoscope in ear-nose and throat surgery

AIM

Endotracheal intubation procedure employed during general anaesthesia is the most effective way for keeping the airways and respiration under control and has low risk of complications. We have aimed in this study to compare the first-attempt success and duration of the endotracheal intubation process and its effects on haemodynamics using the Macintosh laryngoscope and the GlideScope video laryngoscope.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized single-centre study, 100 patients of 18-65 years of age, and classified within the American Society of Anaesthesiologists' (ASA) I-II risk groups before elective ear-nose and throat surgery were included. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, designated as Group M, to be intubated using the Macintosh laryngoscope, and as Group G, to be intubated using the GlideScope video laryngoscope. The Mallampati scores, Cormack-Lehane classifications, intubation duration, number of attempts at intubation, the haemodynamic response and the complications were recorded.

RESULTS

There were not intergroup differences with respect to the number of intubation attempts, the Mallampati and Cormack-Lehane classifications. Duration of intubation was found to be longer in group G. The haemodynamic response values of group M were higher than those of group G. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the number of intubation attempts, two of the patients in group M were intubated in the second attempt.

CONCLUSION

In our study, despite the longer intubation times in group G, the haemodynamic response was significantly lower in this group. It is believed that especially in cases with vital requirement of haemodynamic stability, the GlideScope video laryngoscope would be safer to employ.

Alternative intubation techniques vs Macintosh laryngoscopy in patients with cervical spine immobilization: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background. Immobilization of the cervical spine worsens tracheal intubation conditions. Various intubation devices have been tested in this setting. Their relative usefulness remains unclear.

Methods. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing any intubation device with the Macintosh laryngoscope in human subjects with cervical spine immobilization. The primary outcome was the risk of tracheal intubation failure at the first attempt. Secondary outcomes were quality of glottis visualization, time until successful intubation, and risk of oropharyngeal complications.

Results. Twenty-four trials (1866 patients) met inclusion criteria. With alternative intubation devices, the risk of intubation failure was lower compared with Macintosh laryngoscopy [risk ratio (RR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35–0.80]. Meta-analyses could be performed for five intubation devices (Airtraq, Airwayscope, C-Mac, Glidescope, and McGrath). The Airtraq was associated with a statistically significant reduction of the risk of intubation failure at the first attempt (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.06–0.33), a higher rate of Cormack–Lehane grade 1 (RR 2.98; 95% CI 1.94–4.56), a reduction of time until successful intubation (weighted mean difference −10.1 s; 95% CI −3.2 to −17.0), and a reduction of oropharyngeal complications (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.06–0.93). Other devices were associated with improved glottis visualization but no statistically significant differences in intubation failure or time to intubation compared with conventional laryngoscopy.

Conclusions. In situations where the spine is immobilized, the Airtraq device reduces the risk of intubation failure. There is a lack of evidence for the usefulness of other intubation devices.

Nasotracheal intubation with MacGrath videolaryngoscope using Schroeder directional stylet: Case series

Background and Aims:

MacGrath videolaryngoscope is one of the recent videolaryngoscopes, which can be used to facilitate nasotracheal intubations using Scroeder directional stylet.

Material and Methods:

15 patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists Grades I-II, undergoing tonsillectomy, requiring nasotracheal intubation were included. All patients were intubated with MacGrath videolaryngoscope and Schroeder stylet. Primary outcome measures were duration and ease of intubation. Overall success rate, number of attempts, modified Cormack-Lehane (C-L) grading, and complications were also recorded.

Results:

All 15 intubations were successful during first laryngoscopy attempt. C-L Grade I views were obtained in 14 patients (93%) and Grade II view in one patient (7%). The time required to obtain the best C-L view was 9.4 ± 1.5 s. The time taken to complete tracheal intubation was 34.27 ± 3.38 s. Average numerical rating scale for tracheal intubation was 8.7 ± 0.9. Minor complications occurred in four patients (26.7%).

Conclusions:

MacGrath videolaryngoscope produces excellent laryngoscopic views in patients with normal airways. Impaction of tracheal tube on posterior nasopharyngeal wall can be overcome by Schroeder stylet.

Video laryngoscopes and the obstetric airway

The pitfalls surrounding securing the airway in the obstetric patient are well documented. From Tunstall's original failed intubation drill onwards, there has been progress both in recognition of the difficulties of airway management in the pregnant patient and development of algorithms to enhance patient safety. Current trends in obstetric anaesthesia have resulted in a significant decrease in exposure of anaesthetists, especially trainees, to caesarean section under general anaesthesia, compounding the difficulties in safely managing the airway. Video laryngoscopes have recently appeared in airway algorithms. They improve glottic visualisation and are useful in the management of the difficult non-obstetric airway, including those in morbidly obese patients and in the setting of a rapid-sequence induction. There is growing interest in the potential use of video laryngoscopes in the obstetric population and as a teaching tool to maximise training opportunities.

A review of video laryngoscopes relevant to the intensive care unit

The incidence of difficult direct intubation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is estimated to be as high as 20%. Recent advances in video-technology have led to the development of video laryngoscopes as new intubation devices to assist in difficult airway management. Clinical studies indicate superiority of video laryngoscopes relative to conventional direct laryngoscopy in selected patients. They are therefore an important addition to the armamentarium of any clinician performing endotracheal intubation. We present a practical review of commonly available video laryngoscopes with respect to design, clinical efficacy, and safety aspects relevant to their use in the ICU.

Can the new McGrath laryngoscope rival the GlideScope Ranger portable video laryngoscope? A randomized manikin study

PURPOSE

We hypothesized that novices would be able to use the McGrath MAC (Aircraft Medical Ltd, Edinburgh, UK) equally as well as the GlideScope Ranger (Verathon, Inc, Bothell, WA) for intubation in regular simulated airways.

METHODS

We performed a prospective, randomized crossover study of 39 medical students using the McGrath MAC, GlideScope Ranger, and Macintosh in a manikin with 2 normal airways. The primary outcome was the intubation time. Secondary outcomes included the success rates and the overall glottic view of the 3 laryngoscopes.

RESULTS

The mean intubation times for each attempt with the McGrath MAC were 30.8 ± 16.9 seconds or less and did not differ significantly from those obtained with the GlideScope Ranger or the Macintosh in both airway scenarios (P = .18; P = .49). The mean success rates at each attempt with the McGrath MAC were 82.0% ± 38.8% or more, equal to the Macintosh and the GlideScope Ranger in both scenarios (P = .026; P = .72) except during the first intubation attempt in a normal airway (P = .008). The median grades of the glottic view visible at each intubation attempt with the McGrath Mac were Cormack-Lehane grade 1 (scenario 1: interquartile range, 1-1; scenario 2: interquartile range, 1-2), which was significantly better than the Macintosh laryngoscope in both scenarios. However, the McGrath Mac did not produce a better glottic view than the GlideScope Ranger with either scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

The intubation performance of novices using the McGrath MAC was equal to their performance using the GlideScope Ranger in regular simulated airways.

Cardiac arrest is a predictor of difficult tracheal intubation independent of operator experience in hospitalized patients

Background

Placement of advanced airways has been associated with worsened neurologic outcome in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These findings have been attributed to factors such as inexperienced operators, prolonged intubation times and other airway related complications. As an initial step to examine outcomes of advanced airway placement during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), where immediate assistance and experienced operators are continuously available, we examined whether cardiopulmonary resuscitation efforts affect intubation difficulty. Additionally, we examined whether or not the use of videolaryngoscopy increases the odds of first attempt intubation success compared with traditional direct laryngoscopy.

Methods

The study setting is a large urban university-affiliated teaching hospital where experienced airway managers are available to perform emergent intubation for any indication in any out-of-the-operating room location 24 hours a day, 7 days-a-week, 365 days-a-year. Intubations occurring in all adults >18 years-of-age who required emergent tracheal intubation outside of the operating room between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 were examined retrospectively. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of difficult intubation during IHCA compared to other emergent non-IHCA indications with adjustment for a priori defined potential confounders (body mass index, operator experience, use of videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy, and age).

Results

In adjusted analyses, the odds of difficult intubation were higher when taking place during IHCA (OR=2.63; 95% CI 1.1-6.3, p=0.03) compared to other emergent indications. Use of video versus direct laryngoscopy for initial intubation attempts during IHCA, however, did not improve the odds of success (adjusted OR = 0.71; 95% CI 0.35-1.43, p = 0.33).

Conclusions

Difficult intubation is more likely when intubation takes place during IHCA compared to other emergent indications, even when experienced operators are available. Under these conditions, direct laryngoscopy (versus videolaryngoscopy) remains a reasonable first choice intubation technique.

The difficult airway with recommendations for management--part 1--difficult tracheal intubation encountered in an unconscious/induced patient

Background

Previously active in the mid-1990s, the Canadian Airway Focus Group (CAFG) studied the unanticipated difficult airway and made recommendations on management in a 1998 publication. The CAFG has since reconvened to examine more recent scientific literature on airway management. The Focus Group’s mandate for this article was to arrive at updated practice recommendations for management of the unconscious/induced patient in whom difficult or failed tracheal intubation is encountered.

Methods

Nineteen clinicians with backgrounds in anesthesia, emergency medicine, and intensive care joined this iteration of the CAFG. Each member was assigned topics and conducted reviews of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Results were presented and discussed during multiple teleconferences and two face-to-face meetings. When appropriate, evidence- or consensus-based recommendations were made together with assigned levels of evidence modelled after previously published criteria.

Conclusions

The clinician must be aware of the potential for harm to the patient that can occur with multiple attempts at tracheal intubation. This likelihood can be minimized by moving early from an unsuccessful primary intubation technique to an alternative “Plan B” technique if oxygenation by face mask or ventilation using a supraglottic device is non-problematic. Irrespective of the technique(s) used, failure to achieve successful tracheal intubation in a maximum of three attempts defines failed tracheal intubation and signals the need to engage an exit strategy. Failure to oxygenate by face mask or supraglottic device ventilation occurring in conjunction with failed tracheal intubation defines a failed oxygenation, “cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate” situation. Cricothyrotomy must then be undertaken without delay, although if not already tried, an expedited and concurrent attempt can be made to place a supraglottic device.

Video laryngoscopy improves intubation success and reduces esophageal intubations compared to direct laryngoscopy in the medical intensive care unit

Introduction

Tracheal intubation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) can be challenging as patients often have anatomic and physiologic characteristics that make intubation particularly difficult. Video laryngoscopy (VL) has been shown to improve first attempt success compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL) in many clinical settings and may be an option for ICU intubations.

Methods

All intubations performed in this academic medical ICU during a 13-month period were entered into a prospectively collected quality control database. After each intubation, the operator completed a standardized form evaluating multiple aspects of the intubation including: patient demographics, difficult airway characteristics (DACs), method and device(s) used, medications used, outcomes and complications of each attempt. Primary outcome was first attempt success. Secondary outcomes were grade of laryngoscopic view, ultimate success, esophageal intubations, and desaturation. Multivariate logistic regression was performed for first attempt and ultimate success.

Results

Over the 13-month study period (January 2012-February 2013), a total of 234 patients were intubated using VL and 56 patients were intubated with DL. First attempt success for VL was 184/234 (78.6%; 95% CI 72.8 to 83.7) while DL was 34/56 patients (60.7%; 95% CI 46.8 to 73.5). Ultimate success for VL was 230/234 (98.3%; 95% CI 95.1 to 99.3) while DL was 52/56 patients (91.2%; 95% CI 81.3 to 97.2). In the multivariate regression model, VL was predictive of first attempt success with an odds ratio of 7.67 (95% CI 3.18 to 18.45). VL was predictive of ultimate success with an odds ratio of 15.77 (95% CI 1.92 to 129). Cormack-Lehane I or II view occurred 199/234 times (85.8%; 95% CI 79.5 to 89.1) and a median POGO (Percentage of Glottic Opening) of 82% (IQR 60 to 100) with VL, while Cormack-Lehane I or II view occurred 34/56 times (61.8%; 95% CI 45.7 to 71.9) and a median POGO of 45% (IQR 0 to 78%) with DL. VL reduced the esophageal intubation rate from 12.5% with DL to 1.3% (P = 0.001) but there was no difference in desaturation rates.

Conclusions

In the medical ICU, video laryngoscopy resulted in higher first attempt and ultimate intubation success rates and improved grade of laryngoscopic view while reducing the esophageal intubation rate compared to direct laryngoscopy.

Video laryngoscopy is associated with increased first pass success and decreased rate of esophageal intubations during urgent endotracheal intubation in a medical intensive care unit when compared to direct laryngoscopy

BACKGROUND

To compare the complication rates of urgent endotracheal intubation (UEI) performed by pulmonary critical care medicine (PCCM) fellows and attending intensivists using a direct laryngoscope (DL) versus a video laryngoscope (VL) in a medical intensive care unit (MICU).

METHODS

We studied all UEIs performed from November 2008 through July 2012 in an 18-bed MICU in a university-affiliated hospital. All UEIs were performed by 15 PCCM fellows or attending intensivists using only the DL from November 2008 through February 2010 and the VL from March 2010 to July 2012. Throughout the entire study period, the UEI team leader recorded complications of the procedure using a standard data collection form immediately following the completion of the procedure. This permitted a comparison of complication rates between the DL and the VL.

RESULTS

A total of 140 UEIs were performed using the DL and 252 using the VL. Using the DL, the esophageal intubation rate was 19% and the difficult intubation rate was 22%; using the VL, the esophageal intubation rate was 0.4% and the difficult intubation rate was 7%. There was no significant difference in the rate of severe hypotension, severe desaturation, aspiration, dental injury, airway injury, or death between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The use of the VL for UEI performed by PCCM fellows is associated with a reduction in the rate of esophageal intubation and difficult endotracheal intubation when compared to the use of the DL.

SWIVIT--Swiss video-intubation trial evaluating video-laryngoscopes in a simulated difficult airway scenario: study protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial in Switzerland

Background

Video-laryngoscopes are marketed for intubation in difficult airway management. They provide a better view of the larynx and may facilitate tracheal intubation, but there is no adequately powered study comparing different types of video-laryngoscopes in a difficult airway scenario or in a simulated difficult airway situation.

Methods/Design

The objective of this trial is to evaluate and to compare the clinical performance of three video-laryngoscopes with a guiding channel for intubation (Airtraq™, A. P. Advance™, King Vision™) and three video-laryngoscopes without an integrated tracheal tube guidance (C-MAC™, GlideScope™, McGrath™) in a simulated difficult airway situation in surgical patients. The working hypothesis is that each video-laryngoscope provides at least a 90% first intubation success rate (lower limit of the 95% confidence interval >0.9). It is a prospective, patient-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in 720 patients who are scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia, requiring tracheal intubation at one of the three participating hospitals. A difficult airway will be created using an extrication collar and taping the patients’ head on the operating table to substantially reduce mouth opening and to minimize neck movement. Tracheal intubation will be performed with the help of one of the six devices according to randomization. Insertion success, time necessary for intubation, Cormack-Lehane grade and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score at laryngoscopy, optimization maneuvers required to aid tracheal intubation, adverse events and technical problems will be recorded. Primary outcome is intubation success at first attempt.

Discussion

We will simulate the difficult airway and evaluate different video-laryngoscopes in this highly realistic and clinically challenging scenario, independently from manufacturers of the devices. Because of the sufficiently powered multicenter design this study will deliver important and cutting-edge results that will help clinicians decide which device to use for intubation of the expected and unexpected difficult airway.

Trial registration

NCT01692535

Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

A comparison of the GlideScope video laryngoscope to the C-MAC video laryngoscope for intubation in the emergency department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

There is growing use of video laryngoscopy in US emergency departments (EDs). This study seeks to compare intubation success between the GlideScope video laryngoscope and the C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC) in ED intubations.

METHODS

This was an analysis of quality improvement data collected during a 3-year period in an academic ED. After each intubation, the operator completed a standardized data form reporting patient demographics, indication for intubation, device(s) used, reason for device selection, difficult airway characteristics, number of attempts, and outcome of each attempt. An attempt was defined as insertion of the device into the mouth regardless of attempt at tube placement. The primary outcomes were first pass and overall intubation success. The study compared success rates between the GlideScope video laryngoscope and the C-MAC groups, using multivariable logistic regression and adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

During the 3-year study period, there were 463 intubations, including 230 with the GlideScope video laryngoscope as the initial device and 233 with the C-MAC as the initial device. The GlideScope video laryngoscope resulted in first-pass success in 189 of 230 intubations (82.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 76.6% to 86.9%) and overall success in 221 of 230 intubations (96.1%; 95% CI 92.7% to 98.2%). The C-MAC resulted in first-pass success in 196 of 233 intubations (84.1%; 95% CI 78.8% to 88.6%) and overall success in 225 of 233 intubations (96.6%; 95% CI 93.4% to 98.5%). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the type of video laryngoscopic device was not associated with first-pass (odds ratio 1.1; 95% CI 0.6 to 2.1) or overall success (odds ratio 1.2; 95% CI 0.5 to 3.1).

CONCLUSION

In this study of video laryngoscopy in the ED, the GlideScope video laryngoscope and the C-MAC were associated with similar rates of intubation success.

A systematic review of the role of videolaryngoscopy in successful orotracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study was to organize the literature regarding the efficacy of modern videolaryngoscopes in oral endotracheal intubation, then perform a quality assessment according to recommended external criteria and make recommendations for use.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria included devices with recent studies of human subjects. A total of 980 articles were returned in the initial search and 65 additional items were identified using cited references. After exclusion of articles failing to meet study criteria, 77 articles remained. Data were extracted according to the rate of successful intubation and improvement of glottic view compared with direct laryngoscopy. Studies were classified according to whether they primarily examined subjects with normal airways, possessing risk factors for difficult direct laryngoscopy, or following difficult or failed direct laryngoscopy.

RESULTS

The evidence of efficacy for videolaryngoscopy in the difficult airway is limited. What evidence exists is both randomized prospective and observational in nature, requiring a scheme that evaluates both forms and allows recommendations to be made.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients at higher risk of difficult laryngoscopy we recommend the use of the Airtraq, CTrach, GlideScope, Pentax AWS and V-MAC to achieve successful intubation. In difficult direct laryngoscopy (C&L >/= 3) we cautiously recommend the use of the Airtraq, Bonfils, Bullard, CTrach, GlideScope, and Pentax AWS, by an operator with reasonable prior experience, to achieve successful intubation when used in accordance with the ASA practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway. There is additional evidence to support the use of the Airtraq, Bonfils, CTrach, GlideScope, McGrath, and Pentax AWS following failed intubation via direct laryngoscopy to achieve successful intubation. Future investigation would benefit from precise qualification of the subjects under study, and an improvement in overall methodology to include randomization and blinding.

Comparison of 3 video laryngoscopes with the Macintosh in a manikin with easy and difficult simulated airways

OBJECTIVES

Tracheal intubation is used to maintain a patent airway and can occasionally be difficult in a potentially difficult airway, especially for novice managers. In this study, we evaluated the time required, extent of the difficulty, and number of dental clicks in the tracheal intubation for novice medical students between the Macintosh (Truphatek International Ltd, Netanya, Israel) and 3 video laryngoscopes in normal and difficult simulated intubation positions on manikins on both the table and floor.

METHODS

We recruited 20 medical students as novice airway managers. They used the Macintosh, Truview (Truphatek International Ltd, Netanya, Israel), Glidescope (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA), and Airway Scope (AWS) (Pentax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) laryngoscopes in normal and difficult simulated airways on manikins on both the table and floor. The time to intubate, modified Cormack-Lehane score, intubation difficulty score, and dental click number were estimated and compared.

RESULTS

All 20 medical students completed the study. The AWS required the shortest intubation time, provided the best glottic view and easiest intubation, and resulted in less dental clicks compared with the other 3 laryngoscopes; these phenomena were particularly prominent in the cervical-spine immobilization position on the floor. Although all video laryngoscopes provided better glottic views than the Macintosh laryngoscopy in terms of time to intubate, intubation difficulty score, and the number of dental clicks, the outcomes from the Macintosh laryngoscope were better than those of the Truview and Glidescope.

CONCLUSIONS

The AWS may have the potential for quicker, easier, and safer tracheal intubation in scenarios involving difficult airways for a novice airway manager.

A comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the Macintosh direct laryngoscope for intubation in the emergency department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We determine the proportion of successful intubations with the C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC) compared with the direct laryngoscope in emergency department (ED) intubations.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data entered into a continuous quality improvement database during a 28-month period in an academic ED. After each intubation, the operator completed a standardized data form evaluating multiple aspects of the intubation, including patient demographics, indication for intubation, device(s) used, reason for device selection, difficult airway characteristics, number of attempts, and outcome of each attempt. Intubation was considered ultimately successful if the endotracheal tube was correctly inserted into the trachea with the initial device. An attempt was defined as insertion of the device into the mouth regardless of whether there was an attempt to pass the tube. The primary outcome measure was ultimate success. Secondary outcome measures were first-attempt success, Cormack-Lehane view, and esophageal intubation. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, with the inclusion of a propensity score, were performed for the outcome variables ultimate success and first-attempt success.

RESULTS

During the 28-month study period, 750 intubations were performed with either the C-MAC with a size 3 or 4 blade or a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh size 3 or 4 blade. Of these, 255 were performed with the C-MAC as the initial device and 495 with a Macintosh direct laryngoscope as the initial device. The C-MAC resulted in successful intubation in 248 of 255 cases (97.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 94.4% to 98.9%). A direct laryngoscope resulted in successful intubation in 418 of 495 cases (84.4%; 95% CI 81.0% to 87.5%). In the multivariate regression model, with a propensity score included, the C-MAC was positively predictive of ultimate success (odds ratio 12.7; 95% CI 4.1 to 38.8) and first-attempt success (odds ratio 2.2; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.8). When the C-MAC was used as a video laryngoscope, a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II view (video) was obtained in 117 of 125 cases (93.6%; 95% CI 87.8% to 97.2%), whereas when a direct laryngoscope was used, a grade I or II view was obtained in 410 of 495 cases (82.8%; 95% CI 79.2% to 86.1%). The C-MAC was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 4 of 255 cases (1.6%; 95% CI 0.4% to 4.0%), whereas a direct laryngoscope was associated with immediately recognized esophageal intubation in 24 of 495 cases (4.8%; 95% CI 3.1% to 7.1%).

CONCLUSION

When used for emergency intubations in the ED, the C-MAC was associated with a greater proportion of successful intubations and a greater proportion of Cormack-Lehane grade I or II views compared with a direct laryngoscope.

Glidescope® video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The Glidescope^® video-laryngoscopy appears to provide better glottic visualization than direct laryngoscopy. However, it remains unclear if it translates into increased success with intubation.

Methods

We systematically searched electronic databases, conference abstracts, and article references. We included trials in humans comparing Glidescope^® video-laryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy regarding the glottic view, successful first-attempt intubation, and time to intubation. We generated pooled risk ratios or weighted mean differences across studies. Meta-regression was used to explore heterogeneity based on operator expertise and intubation difficulty.

Results

We included 17 trials with a total of 1,998 patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) of grade 1 laryngoscopy (vs ≥ grade 2) for the Glidescope^® was 2.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 2.5]. Significant heterogeneity was partially explained by intubation difficulty using meta-regression analysis (P = 0.003). The pooled RR for nondifficult intubations of grade 1 laryngoscopy (vs ≥ grade 2) was 1.5 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.9), and for difficult intubations it was 3.5 (95% CI 2.3 to 5.5). There was no difference between the Glidescope^® and the direct laryngoscope regarding successful first-attempt intubation or time to intubation, although there was significant heterogeneity in both of these outcomes. In the two studies examining nonexperts, successful first-attempt intubation (RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.4) and time to intubation (weighted mean difference −43 sec, 95% CI −72 to −14 sec) were improved using the Glidescope^®. These benefits were not seen with experts.

Conclusion

Compared to direct laryngoscopy, Glidescope^® video-laryngoscopy is associated with improved glottic visualization, particularly in patients with potential or simulated difficult airways.

GlideScope videolaryngoscope vs. Macintosh direct laryngoscope for intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Morbidly obese patients are at increased risk of hypoxemia during tracheal intubation because of increased frequency of difficult and impossible intubation and a decreased apnea tolerance. In this study, intubation with the GlideScope videolaryngoscope (GS) was compared with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in a group of morbidly obese patients.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive patients (body mass index ≥ 35 kg/m(2) ) scheduled for bariatric surgery were randomized 1 : 1 to intubation with GS (group GS) or DL (group DL). The primary outcome was intubation time. Secondary outcomes were number of attempts, Cormack-Lehane grade, intubation difficulty scale score (IDS), subjective difficulty of intubation, desaturation, airway bleeding, postoperative sore throat, and hoarseness. Group assignment was not blinded.

RESULTS

Intubation in group GS and group DL lasted 48 (22-148) and 32 s (17-209), respectively (median (range); P = 0.0001); median difference 11 s (95% confidence interval 6-17). Laryngoscopic views were better in group GS with Cormack-Lehane grades 1/2/3/4 distributed as 35/13/2/0 vs. 23/13/10/4 in group DL (P = 0.003). IDS scores were significantly lower with GS than with DL. No other statistically significant differences were found. Two cases of failed intubation occurred in group DL vs. none in group GS (non-significant). Both patients were intubated with the GlideScope without problems.

CONCLUSION

Intubation of morbidly obese patients with GS was slightly slower than with DL. The increased intubation time was of no clinical consequence as no patients became hypoxemic. Both devices generally performed well in the studied population, but the GS provided better laryngoscopic views and decreased IDS scores.

Difficult airway management in the emergency department: GlideScope videolaryngoscopy compared to direct laryngoscopy

BACKGROUND

Videolaryngoscopy has become a popular method of intubation in the Emergency Department (ED), however, little research has compared this technique with direct laryngoscopy (DL).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the success rates of GlideScope (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA) videolaryngoscopy (GVL) and DL in emergent airways with known difficult airway predictors (DAPs).

METHODS

We evaluated 772 consecutive ED intubations over a 23-month period. After each intubation, the physician completed a data collection form that included: demographics, DAPs, Cormack-Lehane view, optical clarity, lens contamination, and complications. DAPs included: cervical immobility, obesity, small mandible, large tongue, short neck, blood or vomit in the airway, tracheal edema, secretions, and facial or neck trauma. Primary outcome was first-attempt success rates. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate the odds of failure for DL compared to GVL.

RESULTS

First-attempt success rate with DL was 68%, GVL 78% (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.001). Adjusted odds of success of GVL compared to DL on first attempt equals 2.20 (odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.51-3.19). After statistically controlling for DAPs, GVL was more likely to succeed on first attempt than DL (OR 3.07, 95% CI 2.19-4.30). Logistic regression of DAPs showed that the presence of blood, small mandible, obesity, and a large tongue were statistically significant risk factors for decreasing the odds of success with DL and increasing the odds of success of GVL.

CONCLUSION

For difficult airways with the presence of blood or small mandible, or a large tongue or obesity, GVL had a higher success rate at first attempt than DL.

Tracheal intubation in the emergency department: a comparison of GlideScope® video laryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy in 822 intubations

BACKGROUND

Video laryngoscopy has, in recent years, become more available to emergency physicians. However, little research has been conducted to compare their success to conventional direct laryngoscopy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the success rates of GlideScope(®) (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA) videolaryngoscopy (GVL) with direct laryngoscopy (DL) for emergency department (ED) intubations.

METHODS

This was a 24-month retrospective observational study of all patients intubated in a single academic ED with a level I trauma center. Structured data forms were completed after each intubation and entered into a continuous quality improvement database. All patients intubated in the ED with either the GlideScope(®) standard, Cobalt, Ranger, or traditional Macintosh or Miller laryngoscopes were included. All patients intubated before arrival were excluded. Primary analysis evaluated overall and first-attempt success rates, operator experience level, performance characteristics of GVL, complications, and reasons for failure.

RESULTS

There were 943 patients intubated during the study period; 120 were excluded due to alternative management strategies. DL was used in 583 (62%) patients, and GVL in 360 (38%). GVL had higher first-attempt success (75%, p = 0.03); DL had a higher success rate when more than one attempt was required (57%, p = 0.003). The devices had statistically equivalent overall success rates. GVL had fewer esophageal intubations (n = 1) than DL (n = 18); p = 0.005.

CONCLUSION

The two techniques performed equivalently overall, however, GVL had a higher overall success rate, and lower number of esophageal complications. In the setting of ED intubations, GVL offers an excellent option to maximize first-attempt success for airway management.

A comparative study on the usefulness of the Glidescope or Macintosh laryngoscope when intubating normal airways

BACKGROUND

The Glidescope Videolaryngoscope (GVL) is a newly developed video laryngoscope. It offers a significantly improved laryngeal view and facilitates endotracheal intubation in difficult airways, but it is controversial in that it offers an improved laryngeal view in normal airways as well. And the price of GVL is expensive. We hypothesized that intubation carried out by fully experienced anesthesiologists using the GVL with appropriate pre-anesthetic preparations offers an improved laryngeal view and shortened intubation time in normal airways. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the GVL with the Macintosh laryngoscope in normal airways and to determine whether GVL can substitute the Macintosh laryngoscope.

METHODS

This study included 60 patients with an ASA physical status of class 1 or 2 requiring tracheal intubation for elective surgery. All patients were randomly allocated into two groups, GVL (group G) or Macintosh (group M). ADS (airway difficulty score) was recorded before induction of anesthesia. The anesthesiologist scored vocal cord visualization using the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) visible and the subjective ease of intubation on a visual analogue scale (VAS). The time required to intubate was recorded by an assistant.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in POGO when using the GVL (P < 0.05). However, there was no difference in the time required for a successful tracheal intubation using the GVL compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope. The VAS score on the ease of intubation was significantly lower for the GVL than for the Macintosh laryngoscope (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

GVL could be a first-line tool in normal airways.

Assessment of the storz video Macintosh laryngoscope for use in difficult airways: A human simulator study

OBJECTIVES

Video laryngoscopy has been shown to improve glottic exposure when compared to direct laryngoscopy in operating room studies. However, its utility in the hands of emergency physicians (EPs) remains undefined. A simulated difficult airway was used to determine if intubation by EPs using a video Macintosh system resulted in an improved glottic view, was easier, was faster, or was more successful than conventional direct laryngoscopy.

METHODS

Emergency medicine (EM) residents and attending physicians at two academic institutions performed endotracheal intubation in one normal and two identical difficult airway scenarios. With the difficult scenarios, the participants used video laryngoscopy during the second case. Intubations were performed on a medium-fidelity human simulator. The difficult scenario was created by limiting cervical spine mobility and inducing trismus. The primary outcome was the proportion of direct versus video intubations with a grade I or II Cormack-Lehane glottic view. Ease of intubation (self-reported via 10-cm visual analog scale [VAS]), time to intubation, and success rate were also recorded. Descriptive statistics as well as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) are reported where appropriate. The Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test was used for comparison testing of nonparametric data.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 39) were residents (59%) and faculty. All had human intubation experience; 51% reported more than 100 prior intubations. On difficult laryngoscopy, a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II view was obtained in 20 (51%) direct laryngoscopies versus 38 (97%) of the video-assisted laryngoscopies (p < 0.01). The median VAS score for difficult airways was 50 mm (IQR = 28–73 mm) for direct versus 18 mm (IQR = 9–50 mm) for video (p < 0.01). The median time to intubation in difficult airways was 25 seconds (IQR = 16–44 seconds) for direct versus 20 seconds (IQR = 12–35 seconds) for video laryngoscopy (p < 0.01). All intubations were successful without need for an invasive airway.

CONCLUSIONS

In this simulation, video laryngoscopy was associated with improved glottic exposure, was perceived as easier, and was slightly faster than conventional direct laryngoscopy in a simulated difficult airway. Absence of secretions and blood limits the generalizability of our findings; human studies are needed.

A comparison between the GlideScope Video Laryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in paediatric patients with difficult airways - a pilot study

The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope may improve the view seen at laryngoscopy in adults who have a difficult airway. Manikin studies and case reports suggest it may also be useful in children, although prospective studies are limited in number. We hypothesised that the paediatric GlideScope will result in an improved view seen at laryngoscopy in children with a known difficult airway, compared to direct laryngoscopy. Eighteen children with a history of difficult or failed intubation were prospectively recruited. After inhalational induction, each patient had laryngoscopy performed using a standard blade followed by GlideScope videolaryngoscopy. The GlideScope yielded a significantly improved laryngoscopic view, both with (p = 0.003) and without (p = 0.004) laryngeal pressure. The mean (SD) time taken to achieve the optimal view was 20 (8)s using conventional laryngoscopy and 26 (22)s using the GlideScope (p = 0.5). The GlideScope significantly improves the laryngoscopic view obtained in children with a difficult airway.

Patient- and operator-related factors associated with successful Glidescope intubations: a prospective observational study in 742 patients

The Glidescope Video Laryngoscope (Glidescope, Verathon Medical, Bothell, WA, U.S.A.) is a relatively new intubating device. It has been proposed to be useful for securing both routine airways and those where direct laryngoscopy may be difficult. In this prospective observational study, data for 742 intubations using the Glidescope were collected to investigate whether four factors are associated with successful tracheal intubation at first attempt using the Glidescope: previous Glidescope experience, previous direct laryngoscopy experience, level of anaesthesia training and clinical airway assessment. The likelihood of successful tracheal intubation at first attempt using the Glidescope increased with increasing previous Glidescope experience. Similarly, success was more likely in airways that were assessed as normal compared with those where direct laryngoscopies were either predicted or known to be difficult. Subgroup analysis indicated 83% first attempt success by 'experienced' Glidescope users in patients with documented difficult direct laryngoscopies. This supports its use as an adjunct device for management of airways where direct laryngoscopies prove difficult. With regard to the level of anaesthesia training, only medical students were more likely to fail with the Glidescope. Success was not associated with previous experience in direct laryngoscopy. The lack of association with direct laryngoscopy experience and level of anaesthesia training (beyond student level) suggests that expertise with traditional airway tools is not necessary to become proficient with the Glidescope.

Comparison of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh, Glidescope, and Airtraq laryngoscopes in easy and difficult laryngoscopy scenarios in manikins

The C-MAC comprises a Macintosh blade connected to a video unit. The familiarity of the Macintosh blade, and the ability to use the C-MAC as a direct or indirect laryngoscope, may be advantageous. We wished to compare the C-MAC with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy. Thirty-one experienced anaesthetists performed tracheal intubation in an easy and difficult laryngoscopy scenario. The duration of intubation attempts, success rates, number of intubation attempts and of optimisation manoeuvres, the severity of dental compression, and difficulty of device use were recorded. In easy laryngoscopy, the duration of tracheal intubation attempts were similar with the C-MAC, Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopes; the Glidescope performed less well. The C-MAC and Airtraq provided the best glottic views, but the C-MAC was rated as the easiest device to use. In difficult laryngo-scopy the C-MAC demonstrated the shortest tracheal intubation times. The Airtraq provided the best glottic view, with the Macintosh providing the worst view. The C-MAC was the easiest device to use.

Comparison of the Cobalt Glidescope video laryngoscope with conventional laryngoscopy in simulated normal and difficult infant airways

AIM

To evaluate the new pediatric Glidescope (Cobalt GVL Stat) by assessing the time taken to tracheal intubation under normal and difficult intubation conditions. We hypothesized that the Glidescope would perform as well as conventional laryngoscopy.

BACKGROUND

A new pediatric Glidescope became available in October 2008. It combines a disposable, sterile laryngoscope blade and a reusable video baton. It is narrower and longer than the previous version and is available in a greater range of sizes more appropriate to pediatric use.

METHODS

We performed a randomized study of 32 pediatric anesthetists and intensivists to compare the Cobalt GVL Stat with the Miller laryngoscope under simulated normal and difficult airway conditions in a pediatric manikin.

RESULTS

We found no difference in time taken to tracheal intubation using the Glidescope or Miller laryngoscope under normal (29.3 vs 26.2 s, P = 0.36) or difficult (45.8 and 44.4 s, P = 0.84) conditions. Subjective evaluation of devices for field of view (excellent: 59% vs 53%) and ease of use (excellent: 69% vs 63%) was similar for the Miller laryngoscope and Glidescope, respectively. However, only 34% of participants said that they would definitely use the Glidescope in an emergency compared with 66% who would be willing to use the Miller laryngoscope.

CONCLUSIONS

The new Glidescope performs as well as the Miller laryngoscope under simulated normal and difficult airway conditions.