Saliva ejector assisted laryngoscopy (SEAL) for protective intubation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lin LW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7334141 | biostudies-literature | 2021 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Saliva ejector assisted laryngoscopy (SEAL) for protective intubation.
Lin Li-Wei LW Chong Chee-Fah CF
The American journal of emergency medicine 20200704
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundData on the routine use of video-assisted laryngoscopy in peri-operative intubations are rather inconsistent and ambiguous, in part due to small populations and non-uniform outcome measures in past trials. Failed or prolonged intubation procedures are a reason for relevant morbidity and mortality. This study aims to determine whether video-assisted laryngoscopy (with both Macintosh-shaped and hyperangulated blades) is at least equal to the standard method of direct laryngoscopy with respect to the first-pass success rate. Furthermore, validated tools from the field of human factors will be applied to examine within-team communication and task load during this critical medical procedure.MethodsIn this randomized, controlled, three-armed parallel group design, multi-centre trial, a total of more than 2500 adult patients scheduled for perioperative endotracheal intubation will be randomized. In equally large arms, video-assisted laryngoscopy with a Macintosh-shaped or a hyperangulated blade will be compared to the standard of care (direct laryngoscopy with Macintosh blade). In a pre-defined hierarchical analysis, we will test the primary outcome for non-inferiority first. If this goal should be met, the design and projected statistical power also allow for subsequent testing for superiority of one of the interventions. Various secondary outcomes will account for patient safety considerations as well as human factors interactions within the provider team and will allow for further exploratory data analysis and hypothesis generation.DiscussionThis randomized controlled trial will provide a solid base of data in a field where reliable evidence is of major clinical importance. With thousands of endotracheal intubations performed every day in operating rooms around the world, every bit of performance improvement translates into increased patient safety and comfort and may eventually prevent significant burden of disease. Therefore, we feel confident that a large trial has the potential to considerably benefit patients and anaesthetists alike.Trial registrationClincalTrials.gov NCT05228288.Protocol version1.1, November 15, 2021.
| S-EPMC10111720 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent trials showed that video laryngoscopy (VL) did not yield higher first-attempt tracheal intubation success rate than direct laryngoscopy (DL) and was associated with higher rates of complications. Tracheal intubation can be more challenging in the general ward than in the intensive care unit. This study aimed to investigate which laryngoscopy mode is associated with higher first-attempt intubation success in a general ward.This is a retrospective study of tracheal intubations conducted at a tertiary academic hospital. This analysis included all intubations performed by the medical emergency team in the general ward during a 48-month period.For the 958 included patients, the initial laryngoscopy mode was video laryngoscopy in 493 (52%) and direct laryngoscopy in 465 patients (48%). The overall first-attempt success rate was 69% (664 patients). The first-attempt success rate was higher with VL (79%; 391/493) than with DL (59%; 273/465, p?<?0.001). The first-attempt intubation success rate was higher among experienced operators (83%; 266/319) than among inexperienced operators (62%; 398/639, p?<?0.001). In multivariate logistic regression analyses, VL, pre-intubation heart rate, pre-intubation SpO2?>?80%, a non-predicted difficult airway, experienced operator, and Cormack-Lehane grade were associated with first-attempt intubation success in the general ward. Over all intubation-related complications were not different between two groups (27% for VL vs. 25% for DL). However, incidence of a post-intubation SpO2?<?80% was higher with VL than with DL (4% vs. 1%, p?=?0.005), and in-hospital mortality was also higher (53.8% vs. 43%, p?=?0.001).In a general ward setting, the first-attempt intubation success rate was higher with video laryngoscopy than with direct laryngoscopy. However, video laryngoscopy did not reduce intubation-related complications. Furthers trials on best way to perform intubation in the emergency settings are required.
| S-EPMC6089856 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundEstablishment of a secure airway is a critical part of neonatal resuscitation in the delivery room and the neonatal unit. Videolaryngoscopy has the potential to facilitate successful endotracheal intubation and decrease adverse consequences of delay in airway stabilization. Videolaryngoscopy may enhance visualization of the glottis and intubation success in neonates.ObjectivesTo determine the efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy compared to direct laryngoscopy in decreasing the time and attempts required for endotracheal intubation and increasing the success rate at first intubation in neonates.Search methodsWe used the search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal. In May 2017, we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating videolaryngoscopy for neonatal endotracheal intubation in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, abstracts of the Pediatric Academic Societies, websites for registered trials at www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlled-trials.com, and reference lists of relevant studies.Selection criteriaRCTs or quasi-RCTs in neonates evaluating videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy.Data collection and analysisReview authors performed data collection and analysis as recommended by Cochrane Neonatal. Two review authors independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion.We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence.Main resultsThe search yielded 7057 references of which we identified three RCTs for inclusion, four ongoing trials and one study awaiting classification. All three included RCTs compared videolaryngoscopy with direct laryngoscopy during intubation attempts by trainees.Time to intubation was similar between videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy (mean difference (MD) -0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.50 to 5.26; 2 studies; 311 intubations) (very low quality evidence). Videolaryngoscopy did not decrease the number of intubation attempts (MD -0.05, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.07; 2 studies; 427 intubations) (very low quality evidence). Moderate quality evidence suggested that videolaryngoscopy increased the success of intubation at first attempt (typical risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.73; typical risk difference (RD) 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.28; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 5, 95% CI 4 to 10; 3 studies; 467 intubation attempts).Desaturation episodes during intubation attempts were similar between videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy (MD -0.76, 95% CI -5.74 to 4.23; 2 studies; 359 intubations) (low quality evidence). There was no difference in the incidence of airway trauma due to intubation attempts (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.80; RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.00; 1 study; 213 intubations) (low quality evidence).There were no data available on other adverse effects of videolaryngoscopy.Authors' conclusionsModerate to very low quality evidence suggests that videolaryngoscopy increases the success of intubation in the first attempt but does not decrease the time to intubation or the number of attempts for intubation. However, these studies were conducted with trainees performing the intubations and these results highlight the potential usefulness of the videolaryngoscopy as a teaching tool. Well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are necessary to confirm efficacy and address safety and cost-effectiveness of videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in neonates by trainees and those proficient in direct laryngoscopy.
| S-EPMC6513507 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8978307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBecause intubation-mediated cervical spine and spinal cord injury are likely determined by intubation force magnitude, understanding the determinants of intubation force magnitude is clinically relevant. With direct (Macintosh) laryngoscopy, when glottic view is less favorable, anesthesiologists apply greater force. We hypothesized that, when compared with direct (Macintosh) laryngoscopy, intubation force with an optical indirect laryngoscope (Airtraq) would be less dependent on glottic visualization.MethodsUsing data obtained in a prior clinical study, we tested whether the slope of the intubation force versus glottic view relationship differed between intubations performed in 14 patients who were intubated twice, once with a Macintosh and once with an Airtraq videolaryngoscope. Slopes were compared using least-squares linear regression and robust regression.ResultsThe slope of the intubation force (N) versus glottic view (%) relationship with the Macintosh (-0.679 [standard error {SE}, 0.147]) was significantly more negative than that of the Airtraq (-0.076 [SE, 0.246]). The least-squares regression difference in slopes was -0.603 (SE, 0.287); P = .046. The robust regression difference in slopes was -0.747 (SE, 0.187); P = .0005. Thus, when compared with the Macintosh, intubation force magnitude with Airtraq laryngoscopy was less dependent on glottic visualization.ConclusionsPreviously, we reported that intubation force with the Airtraq was less in magnitude compared with the Macintosh. Our current study adds that intubation force also is less dependent on glottic view with Airtraq compared with the Macintosh.
| S-EPMC9481653 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6472630 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The rigid tube for laryngoscopy is an instrument used in ENT, for inspecting the larynx and its vicinity. We used it to facilitate intubation, in ENT patients. Methods:Twenty patients attending for surgery were included for study. Group 1 (n=10) had no airway pathology but at least two predictors of an anatomically difficult airway. Group 2 (n=10) had an obstructing airway pathology. After anesthesia induction, classical laryngoscopy was performed, and intubation grade registered. Using the retromolar approach the rigid tube advanced slowly, the epiglottis was lifted, and the vocal cords were visualized. The bougie was introduced through the rigid tube into the trachea, the rigid tube was extracted, and the intubating tube was placed in the trachea, over the bougie. Results:The mean (SD) maneuver duration was 59.4 (18.2) sec. The Cormack-Lehane view of the glottis at classical laryngoscopy was poor in four patients in Group 1 and six patients in Group 2. The lowest desaturation was 82%. No complications other than sore throat were noted. Conclusion:The rigid tube for laryngoscopy is a useful tool for intubation in ENT patients. We noticed an advantage against classical intubation in patients with base of tongue carcinoma, reduced mouth opening and protruding upper incisors with this instrument.
| S-EPMC6395053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The available meta-analyses have inconclusively indicated the advantages of video-laryngoscopy (VL) in different clinical situations; therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine efficacy outcomes such as successful first attempt or time to perform endotracheal intubation as well as adverse events of VL vs. direct laryngoscopes (DL) for double-lumen intubation. First intubation attempt success rate was 87.9% for VL and 84.5% for DL (OR = 1.64; 95% CI: 0.95 to 2.86; I2 = 61%; p = 0.08). Overall success rate was 99.8% for VL and 98.8% for DL, respectively (OR = 3.89; 95%CI: 0.95 to 15.93; I2 = 0; p = 0.06). Intubation time for VL was 43.4 ± 30.4 s compared to 54.0 ± 56.3 s for DL (MD = -11.87; 95%CI: -17.06 to -6.68; I2 = 99%; p < 0.001). Glottic view based on Cormack-Lehane grades 1 or 2 equaled 93.1% and 88.1% in the VL and DL groups, respectively (OR = 3.33; 95% CI: 1.18 to 9.41; I2 = 63%; p = 0.02). External laryngeal manipulation was needed in 18.4% cases of VL compared with 42.8% for DL (OR = 0.28; 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.40; I2 = 69%; p < 0.001). For double-lumen intubation, VL offers shorter intubation time, better glottic view based on Cormack-Lehane grade, and a lower need for ELM, but comparable first intubation attempt success rate and overall intubation success rate compared with DL.
| S-EPMC8658072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effect of video laryngoscopy on the rate of endotracheal intubation on first laryngoscopy attempt among critically ill adults. DESIGN:A randomized, parallel-group, pragmatic trial of video compared with direct laryngoscopy for 150 adults undergoing endotracheal intubation by Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine fellows. SETTING:Medical ICU in a tertiary, academic medical center. PATIENTS:Critically ill patients 18 years old or older. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized 1:1 to video or direct laryngoscopy for the first attempt at endotracheal intubation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Patients assigned to video (n = 74) and direct (n = 76) laryngoscopy were similar at baseline. Despite better glottic visualization with video laryngoscopy, there was no difference in the primary outcome of intubation on the first laryngoscopy attempt (video 68.9% vs direct 65.8%; p = 0.68) in unadjusted analyses or after adjustment for the operator's previous experience with the assigned device (odds ratio for video laryngoscopy on intubation on first attempt 2.02; 95% CI, 0.82-5.02, p = 0.12). Secondary outcomes of time to intubation, lowest arterial oxygen saturation, complications, and in-hospital mortality were not different between video and direct laryngoscopy. CONCLUSIONS:In critically ill adults undergoing endotracheal intubation, video laryngoscopy improves glottic visualization but does not appear to increase procedural success or decrease complications.
| S-EPMC5203695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNasotracheal intubation (NTI) is commonly performed in oromaxillofacial surgeries. We did this metanalysis to ascertain whether use of video laryngoscopy (VL) provided better NTI characteristics as compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL) in patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgeries.MethodsWe performed a systematic search to identify randomized controlled trials comparing VL with DL for NTI in adults undergoing elective oromaxillofacial surgery. The primary outcome was time to intubation. Secondary outcomes included the first attempt success, overall success, incidence of nasal bleeding, Cormack and Lehane grade, and maneuvers required.ResultsOf the 456 studies identified following a systematic search, 10 were included. Meta-analysis showed a significantly lower time to tracheal intubation favoring VL (mean difference: -9.04, 95% CI [-12.71, -5.36], P < 0.001; I2 = 59%). VL was also associated with a greater first attempt success (relative risk [RR]: 1.10, 95% CI [1.04, 1.16], P = 0.001). Maneuvers to facilitate intubation were less with VL (RR: 0.22, 95% CI [0.10, 0.51], P < 0.001). There was no difference in overall intubation success (RR: 1.04, 95% CI [0.98, 1.10], P = 0.17). The incidence of bleeding did not differ between the DL and VL groups (RR: 0.59, 95% CI [0.32, 1.08], P = 0.09).ConclusionsEvidence as per this meta-analysis suggests VL leads to a shorter time to NTI, a greater first attempt success rate, and reduced need for maneuvers when compared to DL. The present study supports use of VL as a first line device for NTI in oral-maxillofacial surgeries in experienced hands.
| S-EPMC8497912 | biostudies-literature