Cargando…

Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study

BACKGROUND: New laryngoscopes have become available for use in small children. The aim of the study was to compare the Storz® videolaryngoscope (SVL) to the Airtraq® Optical laryngoscope (AOL) for tracheal intubation in children younger than two years of age who had a normal airway assessment. Our h...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sørensen, Martin Kryspin, Holm-Knudsen, Rolf
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3469359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22545575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-7
_version_ 1782246067796967424
author Sørensen, Martin Kryspin
Holm-Knudsen, Rolf
author_facet Sørensen, Martin Kryspin
Holm-Knudsen, Rolf
author_sort Sørensen, Martin Kryspin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: New laryngoscopes have become available for use in small children. The aim of the study was to compare the Storz® videolaryngoscope (SVL) to the Airtraq® Optical laryngoscope (AOL) for tracheal intubation in children younger than two years of age who had a normal airway assessment. Our hypothesis was that the SVL would have a better success rate than the AOL. METHODS: Ten children aged 2 years or younger scheduled for elective cleft lip/palate surgery were included. The anesthesia was standardized and a Cormack-Lehane (CL)-score was obtained using a Macintosh laryngoscope. After randomization CL-score and endotracheal tube positioning in front of the glottis was performed with one device, followed by the same procedure and intubation with the other device. The video-feed was recorded along with real-time audio. The primary endpoint was the success rate, defined as intubation in first attempt. Secondary endpoints were the time from start of laryngoscopy to CL-score, tube positioning in front of the glottis, and intubation. RESULTS: Two intubation attempts were needed in two of five patients randomized to the SVL. The difference in time (SVL vs. AOL) to CL-score was 4.5 sec (p = 0.0449). The difference in time (SVL vs. AOL) to tube positioning was 11.6 sec (p = 0.0015). Time to intubation was 29.0 sec for SVL and 15.8 sec for AOL. CONCLUSION: No difference in the success rate of endotracheal intubation could be established in this ten patient sample of children younger than two years with a normal airway assessment scheduled for elective cleft lip/palate surgery. However, the Airtraq® Optical videolaryngoscope showed a number of time related advantages over the Storz® videolaryngoscope. Because of the small sample size a larger trial is needed to confirm these findings. Both devices were considered safe in all intubations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier NCT01090726.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3469359
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34693592012-10-12 Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study Sørensen, Martin Kryspin Holm-Knudsen, Rolf BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: New laryngoscopes have become available for use in small children. The aim of the study was to compare the Storz® videolaryngoscope (SVL) to the Airtraq® Optical laryngoscope (AOL) for tracheal intubation in children younger than two years of age who had a normal airway assessment. Our hypothesis was that the SVL would have a better success rate than the AOL. METHODS: Ten children aged 2 years or younger scheduled for elective cleft lip/palate surgery were included. The anesthesia was standardized and a Cormack-Lehane (CL)-score was obtained using a Macintosh laryngoscope. After randomization CL-score and endotracheal tube positioning in front of the glottis was performed with one device, followed by the same procedure and intubation with the other device. The video-feed was recorded along with real-time audio. The primary endpoint was the success rate, defined as intubation in first attempt. Secondary endpoints were the time from start of laryngoscopy to CL-score, tube positioning in front of the glottis, and intubation. RESULTS: Two intubation attempts were needed in two of five patients randomized to the SVL. The difference in time (SVL vs. AOL) to CL-score was 4.5 sec (p = 0.0449). The difference in time (SVL vs. AOL) to tube positioning was 11.6 sec (p = 0.0015). Time to intubation was 29.0 sec for SVL and 15.8 sec for AOL. CONCLUSION: No difference in the success rate of endotracheal intubation could be established in this ten patient sample of children younger than two years with a normal airway assessment scheduled for elective cleft lip/palate surgery. However, the Airtraq® Optical videolaryngoscope showed a number of time related advantages over the Storz® videolaryngoscope. Because of the small sample size a larger trial is needed to confirm these findings. Both devices were considered safe in all intubations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier NCT01090726. BioMed Central 2012-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3469359/ /pubmed/22545575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-7 Text en Copyright ©2012 Soerensen and Holm-Knudsen; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sørensen, Martin Kryspin
Holm-Knudsen, Rolf
Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title_full Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title_fullStr Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title_full_unstemmed Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title_short Endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
title_sort endotracheal intubation with airtraq® versus storz® videolaryngoscope in children younger than two years - a randomized pilot-study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3469359/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22545575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-7
work_keys_str_mv AT sørensenmartinkryspin endotrachealintubationwithairtraqversusstorzvideolaryngoscopeinchildrenyoungerthantwoyearsarandomizedpilotstudy
AT holmknudsenrolf endotrachealintubationwithairtraqversusstorzvideolaryngoscopeinchildrenyoungerthantwoyearsarandomizedpilotstudy