Dataset Information

Tracheal Tube-Mounted Camera Assisted Intubation vs. Videolaryngoscopy in Expected Difficult Airway: A Prospective, Randomized Trial (VivaOP Trial).

ABSTRACT: Background: Tracheal intubation in patients with an expected difficult airway may be facilitated by videolaryngoscopy (VL). The VL viewing axis angle is specified by the blade shape and visualization of the larynx may fail if the angle does not meet anatomy of the patient. A tube with an integrated camera at its tip (VST, VivaSight-SL) may be advantageous due to its adjustable viewing axis by means of angulating an included stylet. Methods: With ethics approval, we studied the VST vs. VL in a prospective non-inferiority trial using end-tidal oxygen fractions (etO₂) after intubation, first-attempt success rates (FAS), visualization assessed by the percentage of glottis opening (POGO) scale, and time to intubation (TTI) as outcome parameters. Results: In this study, 48 patients with a predicted difficult airway were randomized 1:1 to intubation with VST or VL. Concerning oxygenation, the VST was non-inferior to VL with etO₂ of 0.79 ± 0.08 (95% CIs: 0.75-0.82) vs. 0.81 ± 0.06 (0.79-0.84) for the VL group, mean difference 0.02 (-0.07 to 0.02), p = 0.234. FAS was 79% for VST and 88% for VL (p = 0.449). POGO was 89 ± 21% in the VST-group and 60 ± 36% in the VL group, p = 0.002. TTI was 100 ± 57 s in the VST group and 68 ± 65 s in the VL group (p = 0.079). TTI with one attempt was 84 ± 31 s vs. 49 ± 14 s, p < 0.001. Conclusion: In patients with difficult airways, tracheal intubation with the VST is feasible without negative impact on oxygenation, improves visualization but prolongs intubation. The VST deserves further study to identify patients that might benefit from intubation with VST.

SUBMITTER: Grensemann J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8714897 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Dataset Information

Tracheal Tube-Mounted Camera Assisted Intubation vs. Videolaryngoscopy in Expected Difficult Airway: A Prospective, Randomized Trial (VivaOP Trial).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets