Cargando…

A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients

BACKGROUND: The Glidescope® videolaryngoscope is a new device for tracheal intubation that provides an improved view of the larynx. This study was performed to compare the Glidescope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope in terms of time to intubation (TTI) and number of attempts. METHODS: Patients wer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jeon, Woo Jae, Kim, Kyoung Hun, Yeom, Jong Hoon, Bang, Mi Rang, Hong, Jin-Bum, Cho, Sang Yun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3155131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21860746
http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2011.61.1.19
_version_ 1782210083644506112
author Jeon, Woo Jae
Kim, Kyoung Hun
Yeom, Jong Hoon
Bang, Mi Rang
Hong, Jin-Bum
Cho, Sang Yun
author_facet Jeon, Woo Jae
Kim, Kyoung Hun
Yeom, Jong Hoon
Bang, Mi Rang
Hong, Jin-Bum
Cho, Sang Yun
author_sort Jeon, Woo Jae
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Glidescope® videolaryngoscope is a new device for tracheal intubation that provides an improved view of the larynx. This study was performed to compare the Glidescope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope in terms of time to intubation (TTI) and number of attempts. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups, Glidescope or McGrath group, by using computer-generated numbers. Tracheal intubation was attempted by an anesthesiologist with extensive experience using these two devices. The operator recorded ease of visualization of glottic structures based on the classification described by Cormack and Lehane. Number of failures, number of attempts and their duration, total intubation time, and events during the whole procedure were recorded. The duration of one attempt was defined as the time elapsed between picking up the endotracheal tube and verification of tracheal intubation with visualization of three expiratory carbon dioxide waveforms. TTI was defined as the sum of the duration of all intubation attempts (as many as three), excluding preoxygenation procedures. RESULTS: TTI was significantly shorter for the Glidescope® compared to the McGrath® laryngoscope (40.5 vs. 53.3 s, respectively, P < 0.05). However, glottic views obtained at intubation were similar between the two groups. Number of intubation attempts was not significantly different between the two groups (1.03 ± 0.19 vs 1.10 ± 0.32, respectively) (mean ± SD). CONCLUSIONS: Study results demonstrated that the Glidescope reduced total intubation time in comparison with the McGrath, in terms of TTI in patients with normal airways.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3155131
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31551312011-08-22 A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients Jeon, Woo Jae Kim, Kyoung Hun Yeom, Jong Hoon Bang, Mi Rang Hong, Jin-Bum Cho, Sang Yun Korean J Anesthesiol Clinical Research Article BACKGROUND: The Glidescope® videolaryngoscope is a new device for tracheal intubation that provides an improved view of the larynx. This study was performed to compare the Glidescope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope in terms of time to intubation (TTI) and number of attempts. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to one of two groups, Glidescope or McGrath group, by using computer-generated numbers. Tracheal intubation was attempted by an anesthesiologist with extensive experience using these two devices. The operator recorded ease of visualization of glottic structures based on the classification described by Cormack and Lehane. Number of failures, number of attempts and their duration, total intubation time, and events during the whole procedure were recorded. The duration of one attempt was defined as the time elapsed between picking up the endotracheal tube and verification of tracheal intubation with visualization of three expiratory carbon dioxide waveforms. TTI was defined as the sum of the duration of all intubation attempts (as many as three), excluding preoxygenation procedures. RESULTS: TTI was significantly shorter for the Glidescope® compared to the McGrath® laryngoscope (40.5 vs. 53.3 s, respectively, P < 0.05). However, glottic views obtained at intubation were similar between the two groups. Number of intubation attempts was not significantly different between the two groups (1.03 ± 0.19 vs 1.10 ± 0.32, respectively) (mean ± SD). CONCLUSIONS: Study results demonstrated that the Glidescope reduced total intubation time in comparison with the McGrath, in terms of TTI in patients with normal airways. The Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2011-07 2011-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3155131/ /pubmed/21860746 http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2011.61.1.19 Text en Copyright © the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists, 2011 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Research Article
Jeon, Woo Jae
Kim, Kyoung Hun
Yeom, Jong Hoon
Bang, Mi Rang
Hong, Jin-Bum
Cho, Sang Yun
A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title_full A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title_fullStr A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title_short A comparison of the Glidescope® to the McGrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
title_sort comparison of the glidescope® to the mcgrath® videolaryngoscope in patients
topic Clinical Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3155131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21860746
http://dx.doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2011.61.1.19
work_keys_str_mv AT jeonwoojae acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT kimkyounghun acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT yeomjonghoon acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT bangmirang acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT hongjinbum acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT chosangyun acomparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT jeonwoojae comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT kimkyounghun comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT yeomjonghoon comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT bangmirang comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT hongjinbum comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients
AT chosangyun comparisonoftheglidescopetothemcgrathvideolaryngoscopeinpatients