Comparison of Vie Scope® and Macintosh laryngoscopes for intubation during resuscitation by paramedics wearing personal protective equipment.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is still the gold standard of airway management, but in cases of sudden cardiac arrest in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, ETI is associated with risks for both the patient and the medical personnel. We hypothesized that the Vie Scope® is more useful for endotracheal intubation of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cardiac arrest patients than the conventional laryngoscope with Macintosh blade when operators are wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). METHODS: Study was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed by Emergency Medical Services in Poland. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis who needed cardiopulmonary resuscitation in prehospital setting were included. Patients under 18 years old or with criteria predictive of impossible intubation under direct laryngoscopy, were excluded. Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to Vie Scope® versus direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh blade. Study groups were compared on success of intubation attempts, time to intubation, glottis visualization and number of optimization maneuvers. RESULTS: We enrolled 90 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, aged 43-92 years. Compared to the VieScope® laryngoscope, use of the Macintosh laryngoscope required longer times for tracheal intubation with an estimated mean difference of -48 s (95%CI confidence interval [CI], -60.23, -35.77; p < 0.001). Moreover VieScope® improved first attempt success rate, 93.3% vs. 51.1% respectively (odds ratio [OR] = 13.39; 95%CI: 3.62, 49.58; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Vie Scope® laryngoscope in OHCA patients improved the first attempt success rate, and reduced intubation time compared to Macintosh laryngoscope in paramedics wearing PPE for against aerosol generating procedures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials registration number NCT04365608.

Macintosh Videolaryngoscope for Intubation in the Operating Room: A Comparative Quality Improvement Project.

BACKGROUND: "Macintosh"-videolaryngoscopes (VLs) are VLs that allow both direct and indirect laryngoscopy for intubation. We describe the decision-making and implementation-processes that our hospital used regarding the choice of device. We compared the performances of 4 Macintosh-VLs both in direct and indirect laryngoscopy. METHODS: A quality-improvement-project for airway management aiming at implementing Macintosh-VL for all intubation procedures performed in the operating room, involving 4 Macintosh-VLs (McGrath-Mac, C-MAC-S, C-MAC-S-Pocket-Monitor [PM], and APA). Three consecutive steps were described: (1) direct laryngoscopy with Macintosh-VL, (2) indirect laryngoscopy with Macintosh-VL (intubation attempt with Macintosh-style blade in case of Cormack I or II), (3) intubation attempt with hyperangulated blade in case of Cormack III/IV or failure of Macintosh-style blade. The main end point was the need to move to step III and use a hyperangulated blade. A mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to compare devices on the main end point while considering site as a random effect. Comparison of means was performed using analysis of variance and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (number of laryngoscopy attempts, numeric rate scale [NRS] difficulty of intubation and NRS user-friendliness). Comparison of percentages was performed using a χ2 test for the need to move to step III and a Kruskal-Wallis test for the quality of image (bad, passable, good, very good, excellent). A P value ≤.008 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: From May to September 2017, 589 patients were included. Using the McGrath-Mac (22/180 [12%]) was associated with less use of hyperangulated blade than using the C-MAC-S (39/132 [30%], odds ratio [OR] [99.2% confidence interval {CI}] 0.34 [0.16-0.77], P = .0005), the APA (35/138 [25%], OR [99.2% CI] 0.42 [0.19-0.93]; P = .004), but not the C-MAC-S-PM (29/139 [21%], OR [99.2% CI] 0.53 [0.23-1.2]; P = .04).Overall, the number of intubation attempts was significantly lower using the McGrath Mac than the C-MAC-S or the C-MAC-S-PMVLs. Subjective appreciation of intubation difficulty and user-friendliness of the devices showed respectively lower and higher NRS scores for the McGrath-Mac compared to the other devices, whereas subjective assessment of image quality showed higher quality for the C-MAC-S and C-MAC-S-PM compared to the APA or McGrath-Mac. CONCLUSIONS: Among 4 single-use Macintosh-VLs, glottic visualization in direct and indirect laryngoscopy with the Macintosh-style blade was significantly improved with the McGrath-Mac compared to other Macintosh-VLs, leading to a less frequent need to resort to the hyperangulated blade and reduced overall number of intubation attempts.

From Voice Clinic to Operating Room: Are We Out of Tune?

INTRODUCTION: To determine the consistency and accuracy of preoperative diagnosis in the voice clinic with intraoperative diagnosis and to suggest a standardized laryngeal examination protocol in the UK that is supported by evidence-based findings. METHOD: From January 2011-September 2014, 164 patients were referred to the Multidisciplinary Team voice clinic and diagnosed with laryngeal pathology that required phonosurgery. The visualization (videostrobolaryngoscopy) in clinic was performed using either rigid laryngoscope or a video-naso-laryngoscope. Intraoperatively, laryngeal visualization and surgical procedure was conducted using Storz Aida HD system, 10-mm rigid laryngoscope 0° or 5-mm rigid laryngoscope 0°/30° and a Zeiss S7 microscope. RESULTS: Of the 164 patients seen in the multidisciplinary voice clinic, 86 clinic diagnoses were confirmed intraoperatively (52.4%), 15 patients had the diagnosis confirmed intraoperatively with additional lesion found (9.1%). The clinic diagnosis changed intraoperatively in 63 cases (38.4%). 61 (37.2%) patients seen in the voice clinic were diagnosed with cyst, in 39.3% the diagnosis was confirmed intraoperatively with 5 cases (8.2%) having an additional diagnosis. Twenty (12.2%) patients were diagnosed with polyps, with 80% confirmation intraoperatively; 3 patients (10%) had an additional diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Videolaryngostroboscopy imaging of the larynx provides an outpatient tool for accurately diagnosing more than 50% of laryngeal pathologies when interpreted by multidisciplinary voice clinicians. However direct laryngeal examination under general anesthesia remains the gold standard when obtaining accurate diagnoses of laryngeal pathology. Patients diagnosed with nonorganic voice disorders should be considered for direct laryngoscopy under general anesthetic should they fail to respond to conservative management.

Comparison of Macintosh Laryngoscopy in Bed-up-Head-Elevated Position With GlideScope Laryngoscopy: A Randomized, Controlled, Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately half of all difficult tracheal intubations (DTIs) are unanticipated; hence, proper positioning during intubation is critical to increase the likelihood of success. The bed-up-head-elevated (BUHE) intubation position has been shown to improve laryngeal view, reduce airway complications, and prolong safe apneic time during intubation. In this study, we sought to determine whether the BUHE intubation position is noninferior to Glidescope (GLSC)-assisted intubation with regard to laryngeal exposure. METHODS: A total of 138 American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to III patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups and underwent baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position. Group BUHE patients (n = 69) were then intubated in the BUHE position, while group GLSC patients (n = 69) were intubated using GLSC laryngoscopy. Laryngeal exposure was measured using Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score and Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading, and noninferiority will be declared if the difference in mean POGO scores between both groups do not exceed -15% at the lower limit of a 98% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes measured included time required for intubation (TRI), number of intubation attempts, use of airway adjuncts, effort during laryngoscopy, and complications during intubation. RESULTS: Mean POGO score in group BUHE was 80.14% ± 22.03%, while in group GLSC it was 86.45% ± 18.83%, with a mean difference of -6.3% (98% CI, -13.2% to 0.6%). In both groups, there was a significant improvement in mean POGO scores when compared to baseline laryngoscopy in the sniffing position (group BUHE, 25.8% ± 4.7%; group GLSC, 30.7% ± 6.8%) (P < .0001). The mean TRI was 36.23 ± 14.41 seconds in group BUHE, while group GLSC had a mean TRI of 44.33 ± 11.53 seconds (P < .0001). In patients with baseline CL 3 grading, there was no significant difference between mean POGO scores in both groups (group BUHE, 49.2% ± 19.6% versus group GLSC, 70.5% ± 29.7%; P = .054). CONCLUSIONS: In the general population, BUHE intubation position provides a noninferior laryngeal view to GLSC intubation. The laryngeal views obtained in both approaches were superior to the laryngeal view obtained in the sniffing position. In view of the many advantages of the BUHE position for intubation, the lack of proven adverse effects, the simplicity, and the cost-effectiveness, we propose that clinicians should consider the BUHE position as the standard intubation position for the general population.

Cervical Spine Motion During Tracheal Intubation Using an Optiscope Versus the McGrath Videolaryngoscope in Patients With Simulated Cervical Immobilization: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with an unstable cervical spine, maintenance of cervical immobilization during tracheal intubation is important. In McGrath videolaryngoscopic intubation, lifting of the blade to raise the epiglottis is needed to visualize the glottis, but in patients with an unstable cervical spine, this can cause cervical spine movement. By contrast, the Optiscope, a rigid video-stylet, does not require raising of the epiglottis during tracheal intubation. We therefore hypothesized that the Optiscope would produce less cervical spine movement than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the Optiscope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope with respect to cervical spine motion during intubation in patients with simulated cervical immobilization. METHODS: The primary outcome of the study was the extent of cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1, C1-C2, and C2-C5 segments. In this randomized crossover study, the cervical spine angle was measured before and during tracheal intubation using either the Optiscope or the McGrath videolaryngoscope in 21 patients with simulated cervical immobilization. Cervical spine motion was defined as the change in angle at each cervical segment during tracheal intubation. RESULTS: There was significantly less cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1 segment using the Optiscope rather than the McGrath videolaryngoscope (mean [98.33% CI]: 4.7° [2.4-7.0] vs 10.4° [8.1-12.7]; mean difference [98.33% CI]: -5.7° [-7.5 to -3.9]). There were also fewer cervical spinal motions at the C1-C2 and C2-C5 segments using the Optiscope (mean difference versus the McGrath videolaryngoscope [98.33% CI]: -2.4° [-3.7 to -1.2]) and -3.7° [-5.9 to -1.4], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The Optiscope produces less cervical spine motion than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation of patients with simulated cervical immobilization.

C-MAC Video Laryngoscope versus Conventional Direct Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Background and objectives: To compare the first pass success (FPS) rate of the C-MAC video laryngoscope (C-MAC) and conventional Macintosh-type direct laryngoscopy (DL) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the emergency department (ED). Materials and Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective study conducted from April 2014 to July 2018. Patients were categorized into either the C-MAC or DL group, according to the device used on the first endotracheal intubation (ETI) attempt. The primary outcome was the FPS rate. A multiple logistic regression model was developed to identify factors related to the FPS. Results: A total of 573 ETIs were performed. Of the eligible cases, 263 and 310 patients were assigned to the C-MAC and DL group, respectively. The overall FPS rate was 75% (n = 431/573). The FPS rate was higher in the C-MAC group than in the DL group, but there was no statistically significant difference (total n = 431, 79% compared to 72%, p = 0.075). In the multiple logistic regression analysis, the C-MAC use had higher FPS rate (adjusted odds ratio: 1.80; 95% CI, 1.17-2.77; p = 0.007) than that of the DL use. Conclusions: The C-MAC use on the first ETI attempt during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the emergency department had a higher FPS rate than that of the DL use.

Intubation of non-difficult airways using video laryngoscope versus direct laryngoscope: a randomized, parallel-group study.

BACKGROUND: The video laryngoscope is recommended for intubating difficult airways. The present study aimed to determine whether the video laryngoscope can further improve intubation success rates compared with the direct laryngoscope in patients with non-difficult airways. METHODS: In total, 360 patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using either a video laryngoscope (n = 179) or a direct laryngoscope (n = 181). The following parameters were measured: mouth opening; thyromental distance; sternomental distance; shape angle of the tracheal catheter; and glottic exposure grade. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with level I-II of total glottic exposure in the video laryngoscope group was 100% versus 63.5% in the direct laryngoscope group (P < 0.001). The one-attempt success rate of intubation was 96.1% using a video laryngoscope versus 90.1% using a direct laryngoscope (P = 0.024). The intubation success rate using a video laryngoscope was 100% versus 94.5% using a direct laryngoscope (P = 0.004). Immediate oropharyngeal injury occurred in 5.1% of patients intubated using a direct laryngoscope versus 1.1% using a video laryngoscope (P = 0.033). On postoperative day 1, obvious hoarseness was exhibited by 7.9% of patients intubated using a direct laryngoscope versus 2.8% using a video laryngoscope (P = 0.035). The grade of glottic exposure and catheter shape angle were independent risk factors for tracheal intubation failure. Thyromental distance, shape angle, glottic exposure time, and surgical position were independent risk factors for postoperative complications. Thyromental distance and glottic exposure time were independent risk factors for complications lasting > 2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Intubation using a video laryngoscope yielded significantly higher intubation success rates and significantly fewer postoperative complications than direct laryngoscopy in patients with non-difficult airways. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. No: ChiCTR-IOR-16009023 . Prospective registration.

Comparison of Miller laryngoscope and UEScope videolaryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in four pediatric airway scenarios: a randomized, crossover simulation trial.

With different videolaryngoscopes for pediatric patients available, UEScope can be used in all age groups. The aim of this study was to compare the Miller laryngoscope and UEScope in pediatric intubation by paramedics in different scenarios. Overall, 93 paramedics with no experience in pediatric intubation or videolaryngoscopy performed endotracheal intubation in scenarios: (A) normal airway without chest compressions, (B) difficult airway without chest compressions, (C) normal airway with uninterrupted chest compressions, (D) difficult airway with uninterrupted chest compressions. Scenario A. Total intubation success with both laryngoscopes: 100%. First-attempt success: 100% for UEScope, 96.8% for Miller. Median intubation time for UEScope: 13 s [IQR, 12.5-17], statistically significantly lower than for Miller: 14 s [IQR, 12-19.5] (p = 0.044). Scenario B. Total efficacy: 81.7% for Miller, 100% for UEScope (p = 0.012). First-attempt success: 48.4% for Miller, 87.1% for UEScope (p = 0.001). Median intubation time: 27 s [IQR, 21-33] with Miller, 15 s [IQR, 14-21] with UEScope (p = 0.001). Scenario C. Total efficiency: 91.4% with Miller, 100% with UEScope (p = 0.018); first-attempt success: 67.7 vs. 90.3% (p = 0.003), respectively. Intubation time: 21 s [IQR, 18-28] for Miller, 15 s [IQR, 12-19.5] for UEScope. Scenario D. Total efficiency: 65.6% with Miller, 98.9% with UEScope (p < 0.001); first-attempt success: 29.1 vs. 72% (p = 0.001), respectively. Intubation time: 38 s [IQR, 23-46] for Miller, 21 s [IQR, 17-25.5] for UEScope.Conclusion: In pediatric normal airway without chest compressions, UEScope is comparable with Miller. In difficult pediatric airways without chest compressions, UEScope offers better first-attempt success, shorted median intubation time, and improved glottic visualization. With uninterrupted chest compressions in normal or difficult airway, UEScope provides a higher first-attempt success, a shorter median intubation time, and a better glottic visualization than Miller laryngoscope. What is Known: • Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for adult and children airway management. • More than two direct laryngoscopy attempts in children with difficult airways are associated with a high failure rate and increased incidence of severe complications. What is New: • In difficult pediatric airways with or without chest compressions, UEScope in inexperienced providers in simulated settings provides better first-attempt efficiency, median intubation time, and glottic visualization.

Outcomes in video laryngoscopy studies from 2007 to 2017: systematic review and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints for a core set of outcomes in video laryngoscopy research.

BACKGROUND: Airway management is crucial and, probably, even the most important key competence in anaesthesiology, which directly influences patient safety and outcome. However, high-quality research is rarely published and studies usually have different primary or secondary endpoints which impedes clear unbiased comparisons between studies. The aim of the present study was to gather and analyse primary and secondary endpoints in video laryngoscopy studies being published over the last ten years and to create a core set of uniform or homogeneous outcomes (COS). METHODS: Retrospective analysis. Data were identified by using MEDLINE® database and the terms "video laryngoscopy" and "video laryngoscope" limited to the years 2007 to 2017. A total of 3351 studies were identified by the applied search strategy in PubMed. Papers were screened by two anaesthesiologists independently to identify study endpoints. The DELPHI method was used for consensus finding. RESULTS: In the 372 studies analysed and included, 49 different outcome categories/columns were reported. The items "time to intubation" (65.86%), "laryngeal view grade" (44.89%), "successful intubation rate" (36.56%), "number of intubation attempts" (23.39%), "complications" (21.24%), and "successful first-pass intubation rate" (19.09%) were reported most frequently. A total of 19 specific parameters is recommended. CONCLUSIONS: In recent video laryngoscopy studies, many different and inhomogeneous parameters were used as outcome descriptors/endpoints. Based on these findings, we recommend that 19 specific parameters (e.g., "time to intubation" (inserting the laryngoscope to first ventilation), "laryngeal view grade" (C&L and POGO), "successful intubation rate", etc.) should be used in coming research to facilitate future comparisons of video laryngoscopy studies.

Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Video laryngoscopes are used for managing difficult airways. This study compared three video laryngoscopes' (Pentax-Airway Scope [Pentax], King Vision[King] and McGrath MAC [McGrath]) performances with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) as emergency tracheal intubations (TIs) reference. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The emergency department (ED) and the intensive care unit (ICU) of two Japanese tertiary-level hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive video-recorded emergency TI cases in EDs and ICUs between December 2013 and June 2015. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary study endpoint was first-pass intubation success. A subgroup analysis examined the first-pass intubation success of expert versus non-expert operators. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of first-pass intubation success. RESULTS: A total of 287 emergency TIs were included. The first-pass intubation success rates were 78%, 58%, 78% and 58% for the Pentax, King, McGrath and Macintosh instruments, respectively (p=0.004, Fisher's exact test). The non-expert operators' success rates were significantly higher (p=0.00004, Fisher's exact test) for the Pentax (87%) and McGrath (78%) instruments than that for the King (50%) and Macintosh (46%) instruments, unlike that of the experts (67%, 67%, 78% and 78% for Pentax, McGrath, King and Macintosh, respectively; p=0.556, Fisher's exact test). After TI indication, difficult airway characteristics, and expert versus non-expert operator parameters adjustments, the Pentax (OR=3.422, 95% CI 1.551 to 7.550; p=0.002) and McGrath (OR= 3.758, CI 1.640 to 8.612; p=0.002) instruments showed significantly higher first-pass intubation success odds when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (reference, OR=1). The King instrument, however, (OR=1.056; 95% CI 0.487 to 2.289, p=0.889) failed to show any significant superiority. CONCLUSION: The Pentax and McGrath laryngoscopes showed significantly higher emergency TI first-pass intubation success rates than the King laryngoscope when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, especially for non-expert operators. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000027925; Results.

Measurement of forces applied using a Macintosh direct laryngoscope compared with a Glidescope video laryngoscope in patients with predictors of difficult laryngoscopy: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with predictive features associated with easy direct laryngoscopy, videolaryngoscoy with the GlideScope has been shown to require less force when compared with Macintosh direct laryngoscopy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare forces applied with Glidescope vs. Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients with predictive features associated with difficult direct laryngoscopy. DESIGN: A randomised study. SETTING: Toronto General Hospital, a university tertiary centre in Canada. PATIENTS: Forty-four patients aged over 18 years, with one or more features of difficult intubation, undergoing elective surgery requiring single-lumen tracheal intubation. INTERVENTION: We measured the force applied to oropharyngeal tissues by attaching three FlexiForce Sensors (A201-25) to the concave surface of Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscope blades.Anaesthetists or experienced anaesthesia residents performed laryngoscopies with both devices in a randomised sequence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was peak force. The secondary outcomes were average force and impulse force. The latter is the integral of the force over the time during which the force acted. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 40 individuals. Peak and average forces decreased with GlideScope (17 vs. 21 N, P = 0.03, and 6 vs. 11 N, P < 0.001, respectively). Laryngoscopy time increased with the GlideScope (30 vs. 18 s, P < 0.001), resulting in similar median impulse forces (206 vs. 175 N, P = 0.92). CONCLUSION: GlideScope laryngoscopy resulted in reduced peak and average forces, but as the laryngoscopy duration increased, the product of force and time (impulse force) was similar with both devices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01814176.

Impact of a custom-made 3D printed ergonomic grip for direct laryngoscopy on novice intubation performance in a simulated easy and difficult airway scenario-A manikin study.

Direct laryngoscopy using a Macintosh laryngoscope is the most widely used approach; however, this skill is not easy for novices and trainees. We evaluated the performance of novices using a laryngoscope with a three-dimensional (3D)-printed ergonomic grip on an airway manikin. Forty second-year medical students were enrolled. Endotracheal intubation was attempted using a conventional Macintosh laryngoscope with or without a 3D-printed ergonomic support grip. Primary outcomes were intubation time and overall success rate. Secondary outcomes were number of unsuccessful attempts, first-attempt success rate, airway Cormack-Lehane (CL) grade, and difficulty score. In the easy airway scenario, intubation time, and the overall success rate were similar between two group. CL grade and ease-of-use scores were significantly better for those using the ergonomic support grip (P < 0.05). In the difficult airway scenario, intubation time (49.7±37.5 vs. 35.5±29.2, P = 0.013), the first-attempt success rate (67.5% vs. 90%, P = 0.029), number of attempts (1.4±0.6 vs. 1.1±0.4, P = 0.006), CL grade (2 [2, 2] vs. 2 [1, 1], P = 0.012), and ease-of-use scores (3.5 [2, 4] vs. 4 [3, 5], P = 0.008) were significantly better for those using the ergonomic support grip. Linear mixed model analysis showed that the ergonomic support grip had a favorable effect on CL grade (P<0.001), ease-of-use scores (P<0.001), intubation time (P = 0.015), and number of intubation attempts (P = 0.029). Our custom 3D-printed ergonomic laryngoscope support grip improved several indicators related to the successful endotracheal intubation in the easy and difficult scenario simulated on an airway manikin. This grip may be useful for intubation training and practice.

Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation with Bonfils compared to C-MAC videolaryngoscope: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Direct laryngoscopy (DL) produce tachycardia and hypertension that could be fatal in a patient with a brain injury. Bonfils fiberscope and C-MAC videolaryngoscope are associated with little hemodynamic instability compared to DL. Scientific evidence comparing these two alternatives does not exist. We conducted this study to determine the hemodynamic effects of Bonfils compared to C-MAC in patients undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: Fifty (50) patients listed for elective surgery were randomly assigned to endotracheal intubation with Bonfils or C-MAC. After a standardized induction, intubation was done via the retromolar approach (Bonfils group) or via videolaryngoscopy (C-MAC group). A research assistant, who was not blinded to the intervention, recorded heart rate (HR) and arterial blood pressure (systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure [MAP]) at induction and at every minute during the 5 min post intubation. The primary outcome was the hemodynamic response to intubation, as verified every minute for the first 5 min compared to baseline value. RESULTS: After randomization, the two groups were comparable except for ASA I/II ratio which was slightly higher in the C-MAC group (p = 0.046). Heart rate (p = 0.40) and MAP (p = 0.30) were comparable between the two groups within 5 min post intubation. Intubation time was shorter with C-MAC than with Bonfils (30 ± 2 s vs 38 ± 2 s; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation using the Bonfils fiberscope is comparable to the C-MAC videolaryngoscope among patients scheduled for an elective surgery. In light of these findings, using either technique appears to be a reasonable course of action. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN #34923 , retrospectively registered, 26/03/2018.

An original design of remote robot-assisted intubation system.

The success rate of pre-hospital endotracheal intubation (ETI) by paramedics is lower than physicians. We aimed to establish a remote robot-assisted intubation system (RRAIS) and expected it to improve success rate of pre-hospital ETI. To test the robot's feasibility, 20 pigs were intubated by direct laryngoscope or the robot system. Intubation time, success rate, airway complications were recorded during the experiment. The animal experiment showed that participants achieved a higher success rate in absolute numbers by the robot system. In summary, we have successfully developed a remote robot-assisted intubation system. It is promising for RRAIS to improve the success rate of pre-hospital ETI and change the current rescue model.

Supraglottic airway device versus a channeled or non-channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope for accidental extubation in the prone position: A randomized crossover manikin study.

BACKGROUND: It is very rare but challenging to perform emergency airway management for accidental extubation in a patient whose head and neck are fixed in the prone position when urgently turning the patient to the supine position would be unsafe. The authors hypothesized that tracheal intubation with a videolaryngoscope would allow effective airway rescue in this situation compared with a supraglottic airway device and designed a randomized crossover manikin study to test this hypothesis. METHODS: The authors compared airway rescue performances of the 3 devices-the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA; Teleflex Medical, Westmeath, Ireland) as a reference; the Pentax AWS (AWS; Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) as a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope; and the McGRATH videolaryngoscope (McGRATH; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) as a nonchanneled blade type in a manikin fixed to the operating table in the prone position. Twenty-one anesthesiologists performed airway management on the prone manikin with the 3 devices, and the time required for intubation/ventilation and the success rates were recorded. RESULTS: The median (range) intubation/ventilation times with the PLMA, AWS, and McGRATH were 24.5 (13.5-89.5) s, 29.9 (17.1-79.8) s, and 46.7 (21.9-211.7) s, respectively. There was no significant difference in intubation/ventilation times between the PLMA and AWS. The AWS permitted significantly faster tracheal intubation than did the McGRATH (P = 0.006). The success rates with the PLMA (100%) and AWS (100%) were significantly greater than that with the McGRATH (71.4%). Airway management performance of the PLMA and AWS was comparable between devices and better than that of the McGRATH in the prone position. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that tracheal intubation can provide a more secure airway and more stable ventilation than the PLMA, re-intubation with a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope such as the AWS may be a useful method of airway rescue for accidental extubation in patients in the prone position.

Life Cycle Assessment and Costing Methods for Device Procurement: Comparing Reusable and Single-Use Disposable Laryngoscopes.

BACKGROUND: Traditional medical device procurement criteria include efficacy and safety, ease of use and handling, and procurement costs. However, little information is available about life cycle environmental impacts of the production, use, and disposal of medical devices, or about costs incurred after purchase. Reusable and disposable laryngoscopes are of current interest to anesthesiologists. Facing mounting pressure to quickly meet or exceed conflicting infection prevention guidelines and oversight body recommendations, many institutions may be electively switching to single-use disposable (SUD) rigid laryngoscopes or overcleaning reusables, potentially increasing both costs and waste generation. This study provides quantitative comparisons of environmental impacts and total cost of ownership among laryngoscope options, which can aid procurement decision making to benefit facilities and public health. METHODS: We describe cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) methods and apply these to reusable and SUD metal and plastic laryngoscope handles and tongue blade alternatives at Yale-New Haven Hospital (YNHH). The US Environmental Protection Agency's Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and other environmental Impacts (TRACI) life cycle impact assessment method was used to model environmental impacts of greenhouse gases and other pollutant emissions. RESULTS: The SUD plastic handle generates an estimated 16-18 times more life cycle carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-eq) than traditional low-level disinfection of the reusable steel handle. The SUD plastic tongue blade generates an estimated 5-6 times more CO2-eq than the reusable steel blade treated with high-level disinfection. SUD metal components generated much higher emissions than all alternatives. Both the SUD handle and SUD blade increased life cycle costs compared to the various reusable cleaning scenarios at YNHH. When extrapolated over 1 year (60,000 intubations), estimated costs increased between $495,000 and $604,000 for SUD handles and between $180,000 and $265,000 for SUD blades, compared to reusables, depending on cleaning scenario and assuming 4000 (rated) uses. Considering device attrition, reusable handles would be more economical than SUDs if they last through 4-5 uses, and reusable blades 5-7 uses, before loss. CONCLUSIONS: LCA and LCC are feasible methods to ease interpretation of environmental impacts and facility costs when weighing device procurement options. While management practices vary between institutions, all standard methods of cleaning were evaluated and sensitivity analyses performed so that results are widely applicable. For YNHH, the reusable options presented a considerable cost advantage, in addition to offering a better option environmentally. Avoiding overcleaning reusable laryngoscope handles and blades is desirable from an environmental perspective. Costs may vary between facilities, and LCC methodology demonstrates the importance of time-motion labor analysis when comparing reusable and disposable device options.