• Qin-wen Zhong, Jun-ming Ye, and Shi-yuan Xu.
• First Affiliated Hospital, Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou, China (mainland).
• Med. Sci. Monit. 2014 Jan 1;20:1720-7.

BackgroundConventional endotracheal intubation requires laryngoscopy for a direct view of the glottis. However, laryngoscopy is associated with many potential complications. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of pyriform sinus localization-assisted blind orotracheal intubation with those of conventional laryngoscopic orotracheal intubation.Material And MethodsA randomized, patient-blind, prospective study of 300 patients who underwent various operations was performed. One hundred patients were assigned to the laryngoscopic intubation group (laryngoscopy group), and 200 patients were assigned to the blind intubation group (blind group).ResultsThe total intubation success rate in the blind group was similar to that in the laryngoscopy group (100% vs. 99%, respectively; p=0.33). Oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry in both groups was maintained at >98%. The intubation time was significantly shorter in the blind group than in the laryngoscopy group (9.7±3.4 s vs. 23.0±5.8 s, respectively; p<0.001). Postoperative complication rates were significantly lower in the blind group than in the laryngoscopy group. Recovery time from these symptoms was significantly shorter in the blind group than in the laryngoscopy group (p=0.004).ConclusionsPyriform sinus localization-assisted blind orotracheal intubation was shown to be more effective than conventional laryngoscopic orotracheal intubation in terms of success rate, intubation time, and postoperative complication rate. Moreover, it is less affected by common risk factors; thus, this method may be more beneficial in patients with difficult airways.

12 keywords...

hide…