• J Clin Anesth · Feb 2019

    Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study

    Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

    Although routine videolaryngoscopy does not improve overall success rate of adult nasal intubation, it does improve first pass success, laryngeal visualization and shortens intubation time.

    pearl
    • Jia Jiang, Dan-Xu Ma, Bo Li, An-Shi Wu, and Fu-Shan Xue.
    • Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
    • J Clin Anesth. 2019 Feb 1; 52: 6-16.

    Study ObjectiveNasotracheal intubation (NTI) is a common practice in the oral and maxillofacial surgeries. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine whether videolaryngoscopy (VL) compared with direct laryngoscopy (DL) can lead to better outcomes for NTI in adult surgical patients.MeasurementsOnly randomised controlled trials comparing VL and DL for NTI were included. The primary outcome was overall success rate and the second outcomes were first-attempt success rate, intubation time, rate of Cormack and Lehane classification 1, rate of Magill Forceps used, rate of postoperative sore throat, and ease of intubation.Main ResultsFourteen studies with 20 comparisons (n = 1052) were included in quantitative synthesis. The overall success rate was similar between two groups (RR, 1.03; p = 0.14; moderate-quality evidence). VL was associated with a higher first-attempt success rate (RR 1.09; p = 0.04; low-quality evidence), a shorten intubation time (MD-6.72 s; p = 0.0001; low-quality evidence), a higher rate of Cormack and Lehane classification 1 (RR, 2.11; p < 0.01; high-quality evidence), a less use of the Magill forceps (RR, 0.11; p < 0.01; high-quality evidence) and a lower incidence of postoperative sore throat (RR, 0.50; p = 0.03; high-quality evidence). Subgroup analysis based on whether with a difficult airway showed higher overall success (p < 0.01) and first-attempt success rates with VL (p = 0.04) in patients with difficult airways; however, these benefits was not shown in patients with a normal airway (p > 0.05); Subgroup analysis based on operators' experience showed that success rate did not differ between groups (p > 0.05), but intubation time was shortened by more than 50s by non-experienced operators (p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis based on different devices used showed that only non-integrated VL led to a shorter intubation time (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe use of VL does not increase the overall success rate of NTI in adult patients with general anesthesia, but it improves the first-attempt success rate and laryngeal visualization, and shortens the intubation time. VL is particularly beneficial for patients with difficult airways.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    This article appears in the collection: Are video laryngoscopes superior to standard laryngoscopy?.

    Notes

    pearl
    1

    Although routine videolaryngoscopy does not improve overall success rate of adult nasal intubation, it does improve first pass success, laryngeal visualization and shortens intubation time.

    Daniel Jolley  Daniel Jolley
     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…