Dataset Information

Influence of videolaryngoscopy using McGrath Mac on the need for a helper to perform intubation during general anaesthesia: a multicentre randomised video-no-video trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

We hypothesised that videolaryngoscopy modifies practice of tracheal intubation.

Design

Randomised single-blinded study (video and no-video groups).

Setting

Three institutions: one academic, one non-profit and one profit.

Participants

Patients >18 years, requiring orotracheal intubation, without predicted difficult intubation. Non-inclusion criterion was patients requiring a rapid-sequence intubation. 300 patients were included, 271 randomised, 256 analysed: 123 in the no-video and 133 in the video groups.

Intervention

Tracheal intubation using a McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope, the sequence being video recorded.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The primary outcome was the proportion of intubations where assistance is necessary on request of the operator. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative variables (intubation difficulty scale and its components, percentage of glottic opening score, oesophageal Intubation, duration of intubation, removal of the screen cover in the no-video group, global evaluation of the ease of intubation, bispectral index, heart rate and blood pressure), intraoperative and postoperative complications (hoarseness or sore throat) and cooperation of the anaesthesiology team.

Results

Requirement for assistance was not decreased in the Video group: 36.1% (95% CI 27.9 to 44.9) vs 45.5% (95% CI 36.5 to 54.7) in the no-video group, p=0.74; OR: 0.7 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.1) and absolute risk: 0.10 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.22). Intubation difficulty scale was similar in both groups (p=0.05). Percentage of glottic opening score was better in the Video group (median of 100 (95% CI (100 to 100) and 80 (95%CI (80 to 90) in the no-video group; p<0.001) as Cormack and Lehane grade (p=0001). Ease of intubation was considered better in the video group (p<0.001). Other secondary outcomes were similar between groups. Screen cover was removed in 7.3% (95% CI (2.7 to 11.9)) of the cases in the video group. No serious adverse event occurred. Communication and behaviour within the anaesthesia team were appropriate in all cases.

Conclusion

In patients without predicted difficult intubation, videolaryngoscopy did not decrease the requirement for assistance to perform intubation.

Trial registration number

NCT02926144; Results.

SUBMITTER: Belze O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8724720 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe direct laryngoscopy technique using a Macintosh blade is the first choice globally for most anaesthetists. In case of an unanticipated difficult airway, the complication rate increases with the number of intubation attempts. Recently, McGrath MAC (McGrath) video laryngoscopy has become a widely accepted method for securing an airway by tracheal intubation because it allows the visualisation of the glottis without a direct line of sight. Several studies and case reports have highlighted the benefit of the video laryngoscope in the visualisation of the glottis and found it to be superior in difficult intubation situations. The aim of this study was to compare the first-pass intubation success rate using the (McGrath) video laryngoscope compared with conventional direct laryngoscopy in surgical patients.Methods and analysisThe EMMA trial is a multicentre, open-label, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Consecutive patients requiring tracheal intubation are randomly allocated to either the McGrath video laryngoscope or direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The expected rate of successful first-pass intubation is 95% in the McGrath group and 90% in the Macintosh group. Each group must include a total of 1000 patients to achieve 96% power for detecting a difference at the 5% significance level. Successful intubation with the first attempt is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints are the time to intubation, attempts for successful intubation, the necessity of alternatives, visualisation of the glottis using the Cormack & Lehane score and percentage of glottic opening score and definite complications.Ethics and disseminationThe project was approved by the local ethics committee of the Medical Association of the Rhineland Palatine state and Westphalia-Lippe. The results of this study will be made available in the form of manuscripts for publication and presentations at national and international meetings.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov NCT 02611986; pre-results.

Project description:Background/aimIncreased body mass index (BMI) and neck circumference are the two independent predictors of difficult intubation. McGrath MAC X-Blade is a videolaryngoscope specifically designed for difficult intubations.Materials and methodsEighty patients with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I–III undergoing elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups, nonobese (BMI < 30) and morbidly obese (BMI > 35). All patients were intubated with the McGrath MAC X-Blade in both groups. View optimization and tube insertion maneuvers such as reinsertion of the device, slight removal of the device, cricoid pressure, handling force, 90° anticlockwise rotation of the tube, use of stylet, and head flexion maneuvers were recorded. Cormack–Lehane grades, insertion times, intubation, and total intubation times were recorded. The hemodynamic changes and postoperative minor complications were also recorded.ResultsBody mass index, neck circumference, Mallampati scores, and ASA physical status were statistically higher in the morbidly obese group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05). Sternomental distances were shorter in the morbidly obese (P < 0.05). Cormack–Lehane grades were comparable among the groups. The morbidly obese patients required more reinsertion attempts and cricoid pressure maneuvers during intubation than the nonobese patients (P = 0.019 versus P = 0.012, respectively). Slight removal of the device, handling force, use of the stylet, 90° anticlockwise rotation of the tube, and head flexion maneuvers were also helpful in both groups. Although device insertion times were similar between the groups, intubation and total intubation times were longer in the morbidly obese group (P = 0.009 and P = 0.034, respectively). The groups were comparable in hemodynamic changes and postoperative minor complications.ConclusionThe McGrath MAC X-Blade videolaryngoscope could safely be used both in nonobese (BMI < 30) and morbidly obese (BMI > 35) patients with the aid of some key maneuvers and with a statistically significant but clinically negligible prolongation of the intubation time.

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.