Should the Glidescope video laryngoscope be used first line for all oral intubations or only in those with a difficult airway? A review of current literature

An optimal tracheal tube preshaping strategy for endotracheal intubation using video laryngoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

Although video laryngoscopy solves the problem of glottis exposure, it is difficult to deliver the tube to the glottic opening when the tracheal tube is unevenly shaped. This study aimed to compare the effects of different tube shapes on the first-pass success (FPS) rate in patients undergoing video laryngoscopy-assisted tracheal intubation. Three hundred patients above 18 years of age who underwent general anaesthesia and required endotracheal intubation were included in the study. The participants were randomly allocated to three groups with 100 participants in each group as follows: Group A, video laryngoscopes with a self-equipped stylet are used for tube preshaping; Group B: curvature of the video laryngoscope blade is modelled for tube preshaping; Group C: tube preshaping angle is consistent with the video laryngoscope blade, and the bending point is set 1 cm above the tracheal tube cuff. The primary outcome was FPS rates. The secondary outcomes included time to tracheal intubation, haemodynamic responses and adverse events. No significant differences in patient characteristics or airway assessments were noted (P > 0.05). Compared with Groups A, Group B and Group C exhibited a higher FPS rate (68% vs. 86% vs. 92%; P < 0.001). However, there is no significant difference in FPS rate between Group B and Group C (P > 0.05). And the time to tracheal intubation in Group C was significantly less than that in Group A and Group B (22.21 ± 4.01 vs. 19.92 ± 4.11 vs. 17.71 ± 3.47; P < 0.001). The straight-to-cuff stylet preshape angulation of curvature of the blade could provide a higher FPS rate and shorter time to tracheal intubation during video laryngoscopy-assisted endotracheal intubation. Trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1900026019.

Recent Advances in Videolaryngoscopy for One-Lung Ventilation in Thoracic Anesthesia: A Narrative Review

Since their advent, videolaryngoscopes have played an important role in various types of airway management. Lung isolation techniques are often required for thoracic surgery to achieve one-lung ventilation with a double-lumen tube (DLT) or bronchial blocker (BB). In the case of difficult airways, one-lung ventilation is extremely challenging. The purpose of this review is to identify the roles of videolaryngoscopes in thoracic airway management, including normal and difficult airways. Extensive literature related to videolaryngoscopy and one-lung ventilation was analyzed. We summarized videolaryngoscope-guided DLT intubation techniques and discussed the roles of videolaryngoscopy in DLT intubation in normal airways by comparison with direct laryngoscopy. The different types of videolaryngoscopes for DLT intubation are also compared. In addition, we highlighted several strategies to achieve one-lung ventilation in difficult airways using videolaryngoscopes. A non-channeled or channeled videolaryngoscope is suitable for DLT intubation. It can improve glottis exposure and increase the success rate at the first attempt, but it has no advantage in saving intubation time and increases the incidence of DLT mispositioning. Thus, it is not considered as the first choice for patients with anticipated normal airways. Current evidence did not indicate the superiority of any videolaryngoscope to another for DLT intubation. The choice of videolaryngoscope is based on individual experience, preference, and availability. For patients with difficult airways, videolaryngoscope-guided DLT intubation is a primary and effective method. In case of failure, videolaryngoscope-guided single-lumen tube (SLT) intubation can often be achieved or combined with the aid of fibreoptic bronchoscopy. Placement of a DLT over an airway exchange catheter, inserting a BB via an SLT, or capnothorax can be selected for lung isolation.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

BACKGROUND

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

METHODS

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy.

CONCLUSION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

BACKGROUND

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed.

METHODS

We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which 4 are best practice statements, 9 are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for 6 questions. The topics were: (1) infection control, (2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, (3) hemodynamic support, (4) ventilatory support, and (5) COVID-19 therapy.

CONCLUSION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new recommendations in further releases of these guidelines.