Articles: videolaryngoscope
-
Paediatric anaesthesia · Sep 2022
Review Meta AnalysisVideolaryngoscopes versus direct laryngoscopes in children: ranking systematic review with network meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials.
Videolaryngoscopes improve tracheal intubation in adult patients, but we currently do not know whether they are similarly beneficial for children. We designed this ranking systematic review to compare individual video and direct laryngoscopes for efficacy and safety of orotracheal intubation in children. ⋯ Videolaryngoscopes reduce the risk of failed first intubation attempts and major complications in children compared to direct laryngoscopes. However, not all videolaryngoscopes have the same performance metrics, and more data is needed to clarify which device may be better in different clinical scenarios. Additionally, care must be taken while interpreting our results and rankings due to the available evidence's low or very low quality.
-
J Clin Monit Comput · Aug 2022
Randomized Controlled TrialComparing the first-attempt tracheal intubation success of the hyperangulated McGrath® X-blade vs the Macintosh-type CMAC videolaryngoscope in patients with cervical immobilization: a two-centre randomized controlled trial.
We compared the hyperangulated McGrath X-blade with the Macintosh-type CMAC videolaryngoscope through the use of manual in-line stabilization on patients. The primary hypothesis was that the McGrath X-blade has a similar first-attempt success rate as the CMAC videolaryngoscope. 210 patients of ASA physical status I to III, aged 21 to 80 years old, undergoing general anesthesia requiring tracheal intubation were prospectively recruited into this two-centre randomized controlled trial, from June 2016 to April 2019. Patients with history of or predicted difficult airway, pre-existing dental risks, BMI > 35 kg/m2, cervical spondylosis or myelopathy, aspiration risks, patients who declined to participate or lacked the mental capacity to give consent were excluded. ⋯ Our study did not demonstrate a significant difference in efficacy between the McGrath X-blade and the CMAC videolaryngoscope. In patients with manual in-line stabilization, no anticipated airway difficulty and in the hands of experienced operators, the McGrath X-blade provided superior glottic views but conferred no advantage over the C-MAC, with a longer median time to intubation compared to the CMAC videolaryngoscope. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12616000668404).