Comparison of the TruView infant EVO2 PCD™ and C-MAC video laryngoscopes with direct Macintosh laryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation in infants with normal airways (original) (raw)
Related papers
GlideScope® Versus C-MAC® Video Laryngoscopy in Pediatric Intubation. Does Time Matter?
Iranian Journal of Pediatrics
Background: The emergence of video laryngoscopy in the management of pediatric airways has been invaluable as it has been known that these patients are prone to airway complications. Video laryngoscopes are proven to improve glottic view in both normal and difficult airways in pediatric patients. The time taken to intubate using these devices is inconsistent. Objectives: This study was designed to compare the time to intubate using two common video laryngoscopes, C-MAC®, and GlideScope®, aimed at pediatric patients age 3 - 12 years old. Methods: A Randomized controlled trial was conducted in 65 ASA I or II patients, aged 3 - 12 years old who underwent elective surgery using endotracheal tube. They were divided into group 1 patients who were intubated using C-MAC® video laryngoscope versus group 2 patients who were intubated with GlideScope® video laryngoscope. Laryngoscopists were all anesthetists with experience in both C-MAC® and GlideScope® intubation. Time to intubate and intuba...
The Indian Anaesthetists Forum
Background and Aims: Videolaryngoscopes have attained prime importance in securing the airway in children in the present era. McGrath videolaryngoscope is available with single-use non-channeled fog-free disposable blades of various sizes showing its efficacy for intubation in adults but still lacunae in data related to children. Materials and Methods: In this prospective randomized controlled trial, a total of 88 children of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade I and II aged 1-10 years, weighing 10-20 kg undergoing general anesthesia were enrolled. Using the sealed envelope technique, the children were randomly allocated between Group G, in whom McGrath videolaryngoscope and Group M, in whom Macintosh laryngoscope was used for intubation. The primary aim was to compare intubation time between the two videolaryngoscopes. The secondary outcomes included glottic exposure time, Cormack and Lehane grading, number of attempts of intubation, intubation difficulty scale and complications. Statistical analysis was done using MedCalc software. The Student's t-test and Chi-square test were used for quantitative and categorical data, respectively. Results: The mean intubation time was comparable in both the groups (18.14 ± 17.80 s in Group G vs. 17.30 ± 16.74 s in Group M, P = 0.821). The mean time to glottic exposure was shorter (5.66 ± 4.58 vs. 8.50 ± 5.59 s, P = 0.0108) with decreased number of attempts of tube insertion and less incidences of trauma observed in patients with Group G as opposed to Group M. The Cormack and Lehane grading showed better glottic view in Group G. Conclusion: McGrath videolaryngoscope is as useful as the Macintosh laryngoscope for intubation in children with the added advantages of a better view of the larynx, lesser attempts to intubation, and fewer incidence of trauma.
Indian Journal of Clinical Anaesthesia
There are many studies in India that have compared direct laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy in adults but the published data regarding paediatric population which needs special consideration is limited. The present study was aimed to compare the efficacy of video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy in endotracheal intubation in paediatric patients.The present randomised controlled research was done in 64 children of one to five years that underwent pre-planned surgery. Children were divided into direct laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy groups by randomization. The comparison of the time required for the best visualisation of glottis was the primary outcome measure. The comparison of the time to intubation and number of attempts were the secondary outcome measures. An unpaired student’s t-test and the Chi-square/ Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare the quantitative and qualitative variables respectively.Mean time required for the best visualisation of video laryngoscopy an...
The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 2021
Background: Tracheal intubation is most usually facilitated by the use of a conventional Macintosh laryngoscope. Video and indirect laryngoscopes are becoming more significant tools in the management of the airways in children. Objective: To compare the time of intubation, the number of tries, and the success rate of pediatric intubation by beginner anesthesiologists using a video laryngoscope versus conventional Macintosh laryngoscope. Patients and Methods: This prospective randomized, single-blind clinical was conducted at Zagazig University Hospitals on 52 children aged from 2-6 years who were undergoing elective surgeries. VL Group: (n; 26 patients) intubation using video assisted laryngoscopy (Hugemed type). ML Group: (n; 26 patients) intubation using conventional Macintosh laryngoscope. Duration of intubation, number of trial, hemodynamic response as well as oxygen saturation were recorded at different intervals (base line, after induction, during intubation, after intubation) with assessment of complications. Results: As regard the efficacy and the safety of intubation those patients in ML group had lower intubation time than VL group. There was statistical difference as regard complications of endotracheal intubation as trauma, which was higher in ML group. Conclusion: With the use of a video-aided laryngoscope, it is possible to safely and under supervision to insert an airway into a patient with a difficult airway.
Endotracheal Intubation In Pediatric Patients Using Video Laryngoscopy: An Evidence-Based Review
PubMed, 2015
Endotracheal intubation of pediatric patients is an infrequent, though high-risk, procedure in emergency medicine. Emergency clinicians should be aware of available approaches to assist with successful intubation in pediatric patients. Video laryngoscopy involves the utilization of optical and video technology to facilitate indirect visualization of laryngeal structures during intubation. This technology can be advantageous when intubating patients with normal or difficult airways, and it is increasingly being used in the care of patients in the emergency department. A number of pediatric devices are now available, each with benefits as well as limitations and nuances in technique for use. This evidence-based review describes the emergence of video laryngoscopy into the pediatric and emergency medicine settings. A summary of the existing data on video laryngoscopy use in routine and difficult airways is included, and practical instruction on the use of 3 specific devices approved for use in pediatric patients is provided.
Turkish Archives of Pediatrics, 2021
What is already known on this topic? • Video laryncoscope is primarily recommended in cases where a difficult airway is considered. • When endotracheal intubations of patients with normal airways were performed by experienced physicians, no difference was found between standard direct laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy in terms of intubation success. What this study adds on this topic? • There is a very limited number of studies in the literature among pediatricians, especially in pediatricians who have never used a video laryngoscope and have limited endotracheal intubation experience. • Residents in pediatrics with limited experience in endotracheal intubation use the videolaryngoscope more effectively than the standard direct laryngoscope after appropriate training.
Anesthesiology, 2012
Background Intubation in children is increasingly performed using video laryngoscopes. Many pediatric studies examine novice laryngoscopists or describe single patient experiences. This prospective randomized nonblinded equivalence trial compares intubation time for the GlideScope Cobalt® video laryngoscope (GCV, Verathon Medical, Bothell, WA) with direct laryngoscopy with a Miller blade (DL, Heine, Dover, NH) in anatomically normal neonates and infants. The primary hypothesis was that intubation times with GCV would be noninferior to DL. Methods Sixty subjects presenting for elective surgery were randomly assigned to intubation using GCV or DL. Intubation time, time to best view, percentage of glottic opening score, and intubation success were documented. We defined an intubation time difference of less than 10 s as clinically insignificant. Results There was no difference in intubation time between the groups (GCV median = 22.6 s; DL median = 21.4 s; P = 0.24). The 95% one-sided C...
2018
Background: We compared intubation conditions, intubation times, and hemodynamic response with the GlideScope video laryngoscope or the Macintosh direct laryngoscope in children older than one year. Methods: In total, 80 patients aged 1–12 years, scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation were included in a prospective, randomized trial.After standard anesthesia induction, patients were randomized into two groups.The group G patients(n = 40) were intubated with the GlideScope and the group M patients(n = 40) were intubated with the Macintosh laryngoscope.Intubation time, number of attempts,Cormack–Lehane score, airway maneuvers,visual analog score were recorded. Hemodynamic variables were recorded before and after anesthesia induction, at intubation, and one,three, and five minutes after intubation. Results: The demographic data and operation time were similar between the two groups. The intubation time was longer in Group G. The inci...
Asian Journal of Anesthesiology
Aim: To evaluate and compare the Truview PCD and C-MAC laryngoscopes to the standard Macintosh laryngoscope in paediatric patients. Methods: One hundred and fifty ASA I-II patients in the age group of 1e6 years (10e20 kg) scheduled for elective surgery were randomised into three equal groups for laryngoscopy and intubation with either Truview PCD (Group T), C-MAC (Group C) or Macintosh (Group M) laryngoscopes under general anaesthesia. Percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, application of external laryngeal manoeuvre, time to intubation, number of attempts at intubation, failed intubations, episodes of desaturation and trauma caused were recorded and statistically analysed. A p value of <0.05 was taken as significant. Results: POGO scores were significantly better with Truview PCD as compared with C-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes (94.7 ± 12.9/82 ± 25.0/85.1 ± 17.1; p < 0.01). There were no failed attempts, episodes of desaturation or trauma in any of the patients. The mean intubation time taken was 19.2 s in group T, 12.3 s in group C and 10.7 s in group M, respectively. There is a statistically significant difference among groups (p < 0.01). Eight patients in group T, 21 out of 50 patients in group C and 19 out of 50 patients in group M needed OELM, respectively. There is significant difference among the groups (p < 0.01) Conclusion: Using Truview PCD to assist intubation offers excellent view field of glottic opening after OLEM and the mean time taken is less than 20 s. The Truview PCD tool is suitable for paediatric patients.