ABSTRACT
Objective:To compare the clinical value of video laryngoscopy and conventional laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in neonatal resuscitation.Methods:From July 2018, 100 cases of premature or asphyxia infants born in our hospital requiring tracheal intubation were enrolled. The infants were randomly assigned into video laryngoscopy group and conventional laryngoscopy group with 50 cases in each group. The time needed for intubation, the first time success rate and complications associated with intubation were compared between the two groups.Results:The time needed for intubation (21.7±2.7)s vs.(23.7±1.8)s and the first time success rate [98.0% (49/50) vs. 86.0% (43/50)] were significantly better in the video laryngoscopy group than the conventional laryngoscopy group ( P<0.05). The incidence of intubation complications showed no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusions:Using video laryngoscopy, the time needed for tracheal intubation is shorter and the first time success rate is higher, without more complications. Video laryngoscopy can be safely used in tracheal intubation of neonatal resuscitation.
ABSTRACT
Introducción: Un aspecto relevante en anestesia pediátrica es el manejo de la vía aérea. Diferencias anatómicas de esta población, hace que sean más susceptibles a dispositivos diseñados para su manejo. La videolaringoscopía mejora la visión panorámica de la glotis. El objetivo del presente estudio fue comparar el uso de la videolaringoscopía con la laringoscopía directa para intubación orotraqueal, en pacientes pediátricos. Métodos: Con un diseño descriptivo observacional, se estudiaron 276 casos, pacientes de 5 a 17 años, sometidos a cirugía planificada, con anestesia general más intubación orotraqueal. El especialista decidió el dispositivo para manejo. Los datos se transcribieron de los formularios y analizados con el programa SPSS 22.0. El análisis descriptivo se basó en mediana, moda, promedio, valor mínimo, valor máximo. Medidas de dispersión desvío estándar y rango. Se condideró un valor de p < 0.05 como estadísticamente significativo. Resultados: La edad promedio del estudio fue 9.83 años. Con laringoscopía directa 97.4% se realizó la intubación al primer intento y con videolaringoscopía el 88,4% (P=0.003). En el 94.2% de casos de laringoscopía directa se realizó una intubación exitosa en menos de 10 segundos, con videolaringoscopía fue del 75.2% (P<0.001). Complicaciones se presentaron en el 6.6% de intubaciones con videolaringoscopía versus el 2.6% con laringoscopía convencional (P=0.103). El 56.2% de especialistas prefieren laringoscopía directa para manejar una vía aérea pediátrica sin predictores de dificultad. Conclusiones: La videolaringoscopía brinda un apoyo adicional en el manejo de la vía aérea de rutina, amerita siempre conocimientos y destrezas previas. La evidencia para avalar una técnica por sobre otra es insuficiente
Introduction:A relevant aspect in pediatric anesthesia is the management of the airway. Anatomical differences in this population makes them more susceptible to devices designed for their management. Video laryngoscopy improves panoramic vision of the glottis. Objective: To compare the use of video laryngoscopy with direct laryngoscopy for orotracheal intubation in pediatric patients. Methods: With an observational descriptive design, 276 cases were studied, patients from 5 to 17 years old, undergoing planned surgery, with general anesthesia plus orotracheal intubation. The specialist decided on the handling device. The data was transcribed from the forms and analyzed with the SPSS 22.0 program. The descriptive analysis was based on median, mode, average, minimum value,maximum value. Standard deviation and range dispersion measurements. A value pf p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The average age of the study was 9.83 years. With direct laryngoscopy 97.4% intubation was performed at the first attempt and with video laryngoscopy 88.4% (p = 0.003). In 94.2% of cases of direct laryngoscopy, a successful intubation was performed in less than 10 seconds, with video laryngoscopy it was 75.2% (p = 0.000). Complications occurred in 6.6% of intubations with video laryngoscopy versus 2.6% with conventional laryngoscopy (p = 0.103). 56.2% of specialists prefer direct laryngoscopy to manage a pediatric airway without predictors of difficulty. Conclusions: Video laryngoscopy provides additional support in routine airway management, always requiring prior knowledge and skills. The evidence to support one technique over another is insufficient
Subject(s)
Humans , Airway Management , Intubation , LaryngoscopyABSTRACT
Abstract Background and objectives We compared the efficiency of the King Vision video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope, when used by experienced anesthesiologists on adult patients with varying intubating conditions, in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Methods A total of 388 patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II, scheduled for general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Each patient was intubated with both laryngoscopes successively, in a randomized order. Intubation success rate, time to best glottic view, time to intubation, time to ventilation, Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopy grades, and complications related to the laryngoscopy and intubation were analyzed. Results and conclusions First pass intubation success rates were similar for the King Vision and the Macintosh (96.6% vs. 94.3%, respectively, p > 0.05). King Vision resulted in a longer average time to glottic view (95% CI 0.5-1.4 s, p < 0.001), and time to intubation (95% CI 3-4.6 s, p < 0.001). The difference in time to intubation was similar when unsuccessful intubation attempts were excluded (95% CI 2.8-4.4 s, p < 0.001). Based on the modified Mallampati class at the preoperative visit, the King Vision improved the glottic view in significantly more patients (220 patients, 56.7%) compared with the Macintosh (180 patients, 46.4%) (p < 0.001). None of the patients had peripheral oxygen desaturation below 94%. Experienced anesthesiologists may obtain similar rates of first pass intubation success and airway trauma with both laryngoscopes. King Vision requires longer times to visualize the glottis and to intubate the trachea, but does not cause additional desaturation.
Resumo Justificativa e objetivos Comparamos a eficiência do videolaringoscópio King Vision e do laringoscópio Macintosh, quando usados por anestesiologistas experientes em pacientes adultos com diferentes condições de intubação, em um estudo clínico prospectivo randomizado e controlado. Métodos Foram selecionados 388 pacientes com estado físico ASA I ou II (de acordo com a classificação da American Society of Anesthesiologists - ASA), programados para anestesia geral com intubação traqueal. Cada paciente foi intubado com ambos os laringoscópios sucessivamente, em uma ordem aleatória. A taxa de sucesso da intubação, o tempo até a melhor visibilização da glote, o tempo de intubação, o tempo de ventilação, a classificação de Cormack-Lehane (graus) e as complicações relacionadas à laringoscopia e intubação foram analisados. Resultados e conclusões As taxas de sucesso na intubação na primeira tentativa foram similares para o King Vision e o Macintosh (96,6% vs. 94,3%, respectivamente, p > 0,05). As médias dos tempos até a melhor visibilização da glote (IC 95% 0,5-1,4 s, p < 0,001) e de intubação (IC 95% 3-4,6 s, p < 0,001) foram maiores no King Vision. A diferença no tempo de intubação foi semelhante quando as tentativas malsucedidas de intubação foram excluídas (IC 95% 2,8-4,4 s, p < 0,001). Com base na classificação de Mallampati modificada na consulta pré-operatória, o King Vision melhorou significativamente a visibilização da glote em mais pacientes (220 pacientes, 56,7%) em comparação com o Macintosh (180 pacientes, 46,4%) (p < 0,001). Nenhum dos pacientes apresentou dessaturação periférica de oxigênio abaixo de 94%. Os anestesiologistas experientes podem obter taxas semelhantes de sucesso na primeira tentativa de intubação e de traumas das vias aéreas com ambos os laringoscópios. O King Vision requer tempos mais longos até a visibilização da glote e de intubação traqueal, mas não causa dessaturação adicional.
Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Anesthesia, General/instrumentation , Laryngoscopy/methods , Video-Assisted Surgery/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Airway management in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is chalenging. The aim of this study was to compare the rate of successful first-pass intubation in the ICU by using the direct laryngoscopy (DL) and that by using the video laryngoscopy (VL). METHODS: A randomized, non-blinded trial comparing first-pass success rate of intubation between VL and DL was performed. Patients were recruited in the period from August 2014 to August 2016. All physicians working at ICU received hands-on training in the use of the video and direct laryngoscope. The primary outcome measure was the first-pass intubation success. RESULTS: A total of 163 ICU patients underwent intubation during the study period (81 patients in VL group and 82 in DL group). The rate of successful first-pass intubation was not significantly different between the VL and the DL group (67.9％ vs. 69.5％,P=0.824). Moreover, the overall intubation success and total number of attempts to achieve intubation success did not differ between the two groups. In patients with successful first-pass intubation, the median duration of the intubation procedure did not differ between the two groups. The Cormack-Lehane grades and the percentage of glottic opening score were similar, and no significant differences were found between the two groups. There were no statistical differences between the VL and the DL group in intubation complications (all P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Among ICU patients requiring intubation, there was no significant difference in the rate of successful first-pass intubation between VL and DL.