• LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo

BORIS Portal

Bern Open Repository and Information System

  • Publications
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo
Unibern.ch
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial.
 

Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Options
  • Details
BORIS DOI
10.7892/boris.93958
Date of Publication
May 2016
Publication Type
Article
Division/Institute

Universitätsklinik fü...

Contributor
Kleine-Brüggeney, Maren
Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie
Greif, Robertorcid-logo
Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie
Schoettker, P
Savoldelli, G L
Nabecker, Sabine
Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie
Theiler, Lorenz
Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie
Subject(s)

600 - Technology::610...

Series
British journal of anaesthesia
ISSN or ISBN (if monograph)
0007-0912
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Language
English
Publisher DOI
10.1093/bja/aew058
PubMed ID
27106971
Uncontrolled Keywords

anaesthetic technique...

laryngoscopy; equipme...

airway; intubation

tracheal tube

Description
BACKGROUND

Videolaryngoscopes are aggressively marketed, but independent evaluation in difficult airways is scarce. This multicentre, prospective randomized controlled trial evaluates six videolaryngoscopes in patients with a simulated difficult airway.

METHODS

With ethics committee approval and written informed consent, 12 senior anaesthetists intubated the trachea of 720 patients. A cervical collar limited mouth opening and neck movement, making intubation difficult. We evaluated three unchannelled (C-MAC™ D-blade, GlideScope™, and McGrath™) and three channelled videolaryngoscopes (Airtraq™, A.P. Advance™ difficult airway blade, and KingVision™). The primary outcome was first-attempt intubation success rate. Secondary outcomes included overall success rate, laryngeal view, intubation times, and side-effects. The primary hypothesis for every videolaryngoscope was that the 95% confidence interval of first-attempt success rate is ≥90%.

RESULTS

Mouth opening was decreased from 46 (sd 7) to 23 (3) mm with the cervical collar. First-attempt success rates were 98% (McGrath™), 95% (C-MAC™ D-blade), 87% (KingVision™), 85% (GlideScope™ and Airtraq™), and 37% (A.P. Advance™, P<0.01). The 95% confidence interval of first-attempt success rate was >90% only for the McGrath™. Overall success, laryngeal view, and intubation times differed significantly between videolaryngoscopes (all P<0.01). Side-effects were minor.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial revealed differences in the performance of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with restricted neck movement and limited mouth opening. In this setting, first-attempt success rates were 85-98%, except for the A.P. Advance™ difficult airway blade. Highest success and lowest tissue trauma rates were achieved by the McGrath™ and C-MAC™ D-blade, highlighting the importance of the videolaryngoscope blade design.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: identifier NCT01692535.
Handle
https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/148766
Show full item
File(s)
FileFile TypeFormatSizeLicensePublisher/Copright statementContent
aew058.pdftextAdobe PDF266.22 KBpublisherpublishedOpen
BORIS Portal
Bern Open Repository and Information System
Build: 27ad28 [15.10. 15:21]
Explore
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
More
  • About BORIS Portal
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Service Policy
Follow us on
  • Mastodon
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
UniBe logo