Dataset Information

A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The efficacy of devices for difficult intubation in paediatric patients, especially with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view, has yet to be established. We compared intubating parameters among three devices (the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes).

Methods

This study is a randomised cross-over trial. Participants were 20 anaesthetists. Each device was tested three times using a paediatric manikin with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view. The order to use each device was randomised by a computer-generated random sequence. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful intubation. Secondary endpoints included the time taken to intubate, percentage of glottic opening score, and severity of potential dental trauma.

Results

The successful intubation rates of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes were 100%, 72%, and 45%, respectively. The risk ratio of the success rates of Airtraq® compared with McGrath® and Macintosh laryngoscopes were 1.40 (95% CI; 1.19-1.64, P < 0.001) and 2.22 (95% CI; 1.68-2.94, P < 0.001), respectively. The modified Cormack-Lehane grade and percentage of the glottic opening score were better for the Airtraq® than for the other devices. The dental trauma score was lower for the Airtraq® than for the other devices. There were no significant differences in the intubation time among the groups.

Conclusions

The Airtraq® had higher success rate, had better visibility, and was associated with less dental trauma than the other devices in a difficult paediatric intubation model with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view.

SUBMITTER: Owada G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5302788 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study.

Owada Gen G Mihara Takahiro T Inagawa Gaku G Asakura Ayako A Goto Takahisa T Ka Koui K

PloS one 20170210 2

<h4>Background</h4>The efficacy of devices for difficult intubation in paediatric patients, especially with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view, has yet to be established. We compared intubating parameters among three devices (the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes).<h4>Methods</h4>This study is a randomised cross-over trial. Participants were 20 anaesthetists. Each device was tested three times using a paediatric manikin with a Cormack-Lehane grade 4 view. The order to use each device wa ...[more]

PMID: 28187213

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:King Vision and McGrath MAC video laryngoscopes (VLs) are increasingly used. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of nasotracheal intubation in patients with predicted difficult intubations using non-channeled King Vision VL, McGrath MAC VL or Macintosh laryngoscope by experienced intubators. METHODS:Ninety nine ASA I or II adult patients, scheduled for oral maxillofacial surgeries with El-Ganzouri risk index 1-7 were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated to intubate with one of three laryngoscopes (non-channeled King Vision, McGrath MAC and Macintosh). The intubators were experienced with more than 100 successful nasotracheal intubations using each device. The primary outcome was intubation time. The secondary outcomes included first success rate, time required for viewing the glottis, Cormack-Lehane grade of glottis view, the number of assist maneuvers, hemodynamic responses, the subjective evaluating of sensations of performances and associated complications. RESULTS:The intubation time of King Vision and McGrath group was comparable (37.6?±?7.3?s vs. 35.4?±?8.8?s) and both were shorter than Macintosh group (46.8?±?10.4?s, p?<?0.001). Both King Vision and McGrath groups had a 100% first attempt success rate, significantly higher than Macintosh group (85%, p?<?0.05). The laryngoscopy time was comparable between King Vision and McGrath group (16.7?±?5.5?s vs. 15.6?±?6.3?s) and was shorter than Macintosh group (22.8?±?7.2?s, p?<?0.05) also. Compared with Macintosh laryngoscope, Glottis view was obviously improved when exposed with either non-channeled King Vision or McGrath MAC VL (p?<?0.001), and assist maneuvers required were reduced (p?<?0.001). The maximum fluctuations of MAP were significantly attenuated in VL groups (47.7?±?12.5?mmHg and 45.1?±?10.3?mmHg vs. 54.9?±?10.2?mmHg, p?<?0.05 and p?<?0.01). Most device insertions were graded as excellent in McGrath group, followed by Macintosh and King Vision group (p?=?0.0014). The tube advancements were easier in VLs compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (p?<?0.001). Sore throat was found more frequent in Macintosh group compared with King Vision group (p?<?0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Non-channeled King Vision and McGrath MAC VLs were comparable and both devices facilitated nasotracheal intubation in managing predicted difficult intubations compared with Macintosh laryngoscope. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials registration number NCT03126344 . Registered on April 24, 2017.

Dataset Information

A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A comparison of the Airtraq®, McGrath®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for difficult paediatric intubation: A manikin study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets