Publication: Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial.
| cris.virtual.author-orcid | 0000-0003-0160-2073 | |
| cris.virtualsource.author-orcid | 07bf9ea1-8ad5-485d-a1a1-bad09dfb5e7e | |
| cris.virtualsource.author-orcid | 3e5f9518-08b5-4b2c-8b0f-3b03d7aad0bb | |
| cris.virtualsource.author-orcid | 026b32d7-9fe9-48f0-9cbf-8b0d2138bef6 | |
| cris.virtualsource.author-orcid | 58a5f25a-95b8-4367-9219-cb7fdf2fc922 | |
| datacite.rights | open.access | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kleine-Brüggeney, Maren | |
| dc.contributor.author | Greif, Robert | |
| dc.contributor.author | Schoettker, P | |
| dc.contributor.author | Savoldelli, G L | |
| dc.contributor.author | Nabecker, Sabine | |
| dc.contributor.author | Theiler, Lorenz | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-24T19:07:30Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-10-24T19:07:30Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016-05 | |
| dc.description.abstract | 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. | |
| dc.description.numberOfPages | 10 | |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.7892/boris.93958 | |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 27106971 | |
| dc.identifier.publisherDOI | 10.1093/bja/aew058 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://boris-portal.unibe.ch/handle/20.500.12422/148766 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher | Oxford University Press | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia | |
| dc.relation.issn | 0007-0912 | |
| dc.relation.organization | Clinic and Policlinic for Anaesthesiology and Pain Therapy | |
| dc.subject | anaesthetic techniques | |
| dc.subject | laryngoscopy; equipment | |
| dc.subject | airway; intubation | |
| dc.subject | tracheal tube | |
| dc.subject.ddc | 600 - Technology::610 - Medicine & health | |
| dc.title | Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. | |
| dc.type | article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| dspace.file.type | text | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 679 | |
| oaire.citation.issue | 5 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 670 | |
| oaire.citation.volume | 116 | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Universitätsklinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.contributor.role | creator | |
| unibe.date.embargoChanged | 2019-06-01 00:30:12 | |
| unibe.description.ispublished | pub | |
| unibe.eprints.legacyId | 93958 | |
| unibe.journal.abbrevTitle | BRIT J ANAESTH | |
| unibe.refereed | true | |
| unibe.subtype.article | journal |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
- Name:
- aew058.pdf
- Size:
- 266.22 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- File Type:
- text
- License:
- publisher
- Content:
- published