A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery / Estudo comparativo randomizado do efeito do laringoscópio óptico Airtraq vs. laringoscópio Macintosh sobre a pressão intraocular em cirurgia não oftálmica

BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n = 45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n = 45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.

JUSTIFICATIVA: Comparar as alterações de pressão intraocular após laringoscopia e intubação com lâmina Macintosh convencional e laringoscópio óptico Airtraq. MÉTODOS: Noventa pacientes adultos foram randomicamente designados para os grupos estudo ou controle. No grupo estudo (n = 45) o laringoscópio Airtraq foi usado para laringoscopia e no grupo controle (n = 45) o laringoscópio Macintosh convencional foi usado para laringoscopia. A pressão intraocular foi mensurada no pré-operatório com tonômetro Schiotz. A laringoscopia foi feita de acordo com o protocolo de cada grupo. Pressão intraocular e parâmetros hemodinâmicos foram registrados logo antes da inserção do dispositivo e três vezes após a inserção do dispositivo, com intervalo de um minuto. RESULTADOS: As características dos pacientes, os parâmetros hemodinâmicos basais e a PIO basal foram comparáveis nos dois grupos. Após a inserção do tubo endotraqueal com o laringoscópio Macintosh, houve um aumento estatisticamente significativo da frequência cardíaca e da pressão intraocular em comparação com o grupo Airtraq. Não houve alteração significativa da PAM. Oito pacientes do grupo Macintosh sofreram trauma de língua-lábio-dental durante a intubação, enquanto apenas dois pacientes sofreram trauma das vias aéreas superiores no grupo Airtraq. CONCLUSÃO: Concluímos que o laringoscópio Airtraq, em comparação com o laringoscópio Macintosh, resultou em elevações significativamente menores da PIO e em aumentos clinicamente menos acentuados da resposta hemodinâmica à laringoscopia e intubação.

A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery.

BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n=45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n=45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.

[A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery]. / Estudo comparativo randomizado do efeito do laringoscópio óptico Airtraq vs. laringoscópio Macintosh sobre a pressão intraocular em cirurgia não oftálmica.

BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n=45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n=45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.

A comparative study of three methods of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway insertion in children with simulated difficult laryngoscopy using a rigid neck collar.

BACKGROUND: Combined introducer tool and stylet technique of ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) insertion was compared with the conventional digital manipulation and introducer tool technique in children with a rigid neck collar. METHODS: This was a randomized, single blinded, prospective study. Ninety ASA Grade I-II children weighing 10-20 kg were randomly allocated for PLMA insertion using the digital, introducer tool (IT) or combined IT and stylet techniques. Each group contained 30 patients. Difficult laryngoscopy was simulated using a rigid neck collar. The laryngoscopic view was graded prior to PLMA insertion. The digital and IT techniques were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. The combined technique involved attaching the IT to the PLMA and inserting a flexible stylet through the drain tube. RESULTS: The median Cormack and Lehane grade was 2 in all three groups. Insertion was more frequently successful with the combined technique at the first attempt (combined 100%, digital 65.38%, IT 66.67%; p < 0.05), but success after three attempts was similar (combined 100%, digital 86.67%, IT 90%; p > 0.05). The time taken for successful placement was similar among groups at the first attempt, but was shorter for the combined technique for overall attempts (combined 18.33 ± 1.27 seconds, digital 27.85 ± 9.05 seconds, IT 26.89 ± 7.17 seconds; p < 0.05). There was no difference in postoperative airway morbidity. CONCLUSION: PLMA insertion with combined IT and stylet technique was more frequently successful than the digital or IT technique in pediatric patients without cervical spine motion.