Cargando…
Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study
BACKGROUND: Videolaryngoscopy presents a new approach for the management of the difficult and rescue airway. There is little available evidence to compare the performance features of these devices in true difficult laryngoscopy. METHODS: A prospective randomized crossover study was performed compari...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22720884 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-11 |
_version_ | 1782252673945305088 |
---|---|
author | Healy, David W Picton, Paul Morris, Michelle Turner, Christopher |
author_facet | Healy, David W Picton, Paul Morris, Michelle Turner, Christopher |
author_sort | Healy, David W |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Videolaryngoscopy presents a new approach for the management of the difficult and rescue airway. There is little available evidence to compare the performance features of these devices in true difficult laryngoscopy. METHODS: A prospective randomized crossover study was performed comparing the performance features of the Macintosh Laryngoscope, Glidescope, Storz CMAC and Storz DCI videolaryngoscope. Thirty anesthesia providers attempted intubation with each of the 4 laryngoscopes in a high fidelity difficult laryngoscopy manikin. The time to successful intubation (TTSI) was recorded for each device, along with failure rate, and the best view of the glottis obtained. RESULTS: Use of the Glidescope, CMAC and Storz videolaryngoscopes improved the view of the glottis compared with use of the Macintosh blade (GEE, p = 0.000, p = 0.002, p = 0.000 respectively). Use of the CMAC resulted in an improved view compared with use of the Storz VL (Fishers, p = 0.05). Use of the Glidescope or Storz videolaryngoscope blade resulted in a longer TTSI compared with either the Macintosh (GLM, p = 0.000, p = 0.029 respectively) or CMAC blades (GLM, p = 0.000, p = 0.033 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Unsurprisingly, when used in a simulated difficult laryngoscopy, all the videolaryngoscopes resulted in a better view of the glottis than the Macintosh blade. However, interestingly the CMAC was found to provide a better laryngoscopic view that the Storz DCI Videolaryngoscope. Additionally, use of either the Glidescope or Storz DCI Videolaryngoscope resulted in a prolonged time to successful intubation compared with use of the CMAC or Macintosh blade. The use of the CMAC during manikin simulated difficult laryngoscopy combined the efficacy of attainment of laryngoscopic view with the expediency of successful intubation. Use of the Macintosh blade combined expedience with success, despite a limited laryngoscopic view. The limitations of a manikin model of difficult laryngoscopy limits the conclusions for extrapolation into clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3519500 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35195002012-12-12 Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study Healy, David W Picton, Paul Morris, Michelle Turner, Christopher BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Videolaryngoscopy presents a new approach for the management of the difficult and rescue airway. There is little available evidence to compare the performance features of these devices in true difficult laryngoscopy. METHODS: A prospective randomized crossover study was performed comparing the performance features of the Macintosh Laryngoscope, Glidescope, Storz CMAC and Storz DCI videolaryngoscope. Thirty anesthesia providers attempted intubation with each of the 4 laryngoscopes in a high fidelity difficult laryngoscopy manikin. The time to successful intubation (TTSI) was recorded for each device, along with failure rate, and the best view of the glottis obtained. RESULTS: Use of the Glidescope, CMAC and Storz videolaryngoscopes improved the view of the glottis compared with use of the Macintosh blade (GEE, p = 0.000, p = 0.002, p = 0.000 respectively). Use of the CMAC resulted in an improved view compared with use of the Storz VL (Fishers, p = 0.05). Use of the Glidescope or Storz videolaryngoscope blade resulted in a longer TTSI compared with either the Macintosh (GLM, p = 0.000, p = 0.029 respectively) or CMAC blades (GLM, p = 0.000, p = 0.033 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Unsurprisingly, when used in a simulated difficult laryngoscopy, all the videolaryngoscopes resulted in a better view of the glottis than the Macintosh blade. However, interestingly the CMAC was found to provide a better laryngoscopic view that the Storz DCI Videolaryngoscope. Additionally, use of either the Glidescope or Storz DCI Videolaryngoscope resulted in a prolonged time to successful intubation compared with use of the CMAC or Macintosh blade. The use of the CMAC during manikin simulated difficult laryngoscopy combined the efficacy of attainment of laryngoscopic view with the expediency of successful intubation. Use of the Macintosh blade combined expedience with success, despite a limited laryngoscopic view. The limitations of a manikin model of difficult laryngoscopy limits the conclusions for extrapolation into clinical practice. BioMed Central 2012-06-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3519500/ /pubmed/22720884 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-11 Text en Copyright ©2012 Healy et al.; 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 Healy, David W Picton, Paul Morris, Michelle Turner, Christopher Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title | Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title_full | Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title_short | Comparison of the glidescope, CMAC, storz DCI with the Macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
title_sort | comparison of the glidescope, cmac, storz dci with the macintosh laryngoscope during simulated difficult laryngoscopy: a manikin study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22720884 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2253-12-11 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT healydavidw comparisonoftheglidescopecmacstorzdciwiththemacintoshlaryngoscopeduringsimulateddifficultlaryngoscopyamanikinstudy AT pictonpaul comparisonoftheglidescopecmacstorzdciwiththemacintoshlaryngoscopeduringsimulateddifficultlaryngoscopyamanikinstudy AT morrismichelle comparisonoftheglidescopecmacstorzdciwiththemacintoshlaryngoscopeduringsimulateddifficultlaryngoscopyamanikinstudy AT turnerchristopher comparisonoftheglidescopecmacstorzdciwiththemacintoshlaryngoscopeduringsimulateddifficultlaryngoscopyamanikinstudy |