• Hyun-Jeong Kwak, Seong-Yeon Lee, Sook-Young Lee, Sang-Hyun Cho, Hong-Soon Kim, and Jong-Yeop Kim.
• Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Gachon University, Gil Medical Center, Incheon, Korea.
• J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2016 Feb 1; 74 (2): 256-61.

PurposeThe McGrath video laryngoscope (VL) offers excellent laryngoscopic views and increases the success rate of orotracheal intubation in patients with normal and difficult airways. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the McGrath VL with the Macintosh laryngoscope to investigate the efficacy of the McGrath VL for routine nasotracheal intubation in patients with an expected normal airway.Materials And MethodsTo address the research purpose, the efficacy of the McGrath VL for routine nasotracheal intubation was compared with that of the Macintosh laryngoscope. The predictor variable was the laryngoscopic technique (McGrath VL vs Macintosh laryngoscope). The outcome variables were the time to successful intubation, laryngoscopic views before and after optimal external laryngeal manipulation (OELM), use of Magill forceps, ease of intubation, and severity of oropharyngeal bleeding.ResultsData from 35 patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery were assessed. The time to intubation was 10.5 seconds shorter in the McGrath group than in the Macintosh group (34.4 ± 13.7 vs 44.9 ± 15.6 seconds; P = .004). The incidence of grade 1 glottic view before OELM was higher in the McGrath group than in the Macintosh group (83 vs 57%; P = .019). The frequency of Magill forceps use was lower in the McGrath group than in the Macintosh group (6 vs 34%; P = .003).ConclusionMcGrath VL facilitates routine nasotracheal intubation in expected normal airways by providing a shorter intubation time and better laryngoscopic views compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope.Copyright © 2016 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

43 keywords...

hide…