• Yuka Uchinami, Noriaki Fujita, Takashi Ando, Kazuyuki Mizunoya, Koji Hoshino, Isao Yokota, and Yuji Morimoto.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Hokkaido University Hospital, N14 W5, Sapporo, 060-8648, Japan. yukauma923@gmail.com.
• J Anesth. 2022 Dec 1; 36 (6): 707714707-714.

PurposeStudies in adults have reported that video laryngoscope is more useful than direct laryngoscope when training less experienced anesthesiologists. However, whether this is true for infants remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate whether the use of video laryngoscope would result in smaller differences in success rate according to anesthesiologists' expertise than those in direct laryngoscope.MethodsMedical records and video recordings from the operating room of patients aged < 1 year who underwent non-cardiac surgery between March 2019 and September 2021 were reviewed. Tracheal intubations between April 8, 2020, and June 20, 2021, were excluded due to the shortage of video laryngoscope blades during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rates of first-time tracheal intubation success were compared by years of anesthesia experience and initial intubation device.ResultsIn total, 125 of 175 tracheal intubations were analyzed (direct laryngoscope group, n = 72; video laryngoscope group, n = 53). The first-time tracheal intubation success rate increased with years of experience as an anesthesiologist in the direct laryngoscope group (odds ratio OR 1.70, 95% confidence interval CI 1.15, 2.49; P = 0.0070), but not the video laryngoscope group (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74, 1.35; P = 0.99).ConclusionThe differences in success rate according to the anesthesiologists' years of experience were non-significant when using video laryngoscope in infants, compared to those in direct laryngoscope.© 2022. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists.

14 keywords...

hide…