Cargando…
Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study
OBJECTIVE: Video laryngoscopes are used for managing difficult airways. This study compared three video laryngoscopes’ (Pentax-Airway Scope [Pentax], King Vision[King] and McGrath MAC [McGrath]) performances with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) as emergency tracheal intubations (TIs) r...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6475241/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30928937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024927 |
_version_ | 1783412742003097600 |
---|---|
author | Suzuki, Kei Kusunoki, Shinji Tanigawa, Koichi Shime, Nobuaki |
author_facet | Suzuki, Kei Kusunoki, Shinji Tanigawa, Koichi Shime, Nobuaki |
author_sort | Suzuki, Kei |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Video laryngoscopes are used for managing difficult airways. This study compared three video laryngoscopes’ (Pentax-Airway Scope [Pentax], King Vision[King] and McGrath MAC [McGrath]) performances with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) as emergency tracheal intubations (TIs) reference. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The emergency department (ED) and the intensive care unit (ICU) of two Japanese tertiary-level hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive video-recorded emergency TI cases in EDs and ICUs between December 2013 and June 2015. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary study endpoint was first-pass intubation success. A subgroup analysis examined the first-pass intubation success of expert versus non-expert operators. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of first-pass intubation success. RESULTS: A total of 287 emergency TIs were included. The first-pass intubation success rates were 78%, 58%, 78% and 58% for the Pentax, King, McGrath and Macintosh instruments, respectively (p=0.004, Fisher’s exact test). The non-expert operators’ success rates were significantly higher (p=0.00004, Fisher’s exact test) for the Pentax (87%) and McGrath (78%) instruments than that for the King (50%) and Macintosh (46%) instruments, unlike that of the experts (67%, 67%, 78% and 78% for Pentax, McGrath, King and Macintosh, respectively; p=0.556, Fisher’s exact test). After TI indication, difficult airway characteristics, and expert versus non-expert operator parameters adjustments, the Pentax (OR=3.422, 95% CI 1.551 to 7.550; p=0.002) and McGrath (OR= 3.758, CI 1.640 to 8.612; p=0.002) instruments showed significantly higher first-pass intubation success odds when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (reference, OR=1). The King instrument, however, (OR=1.056; 95% CI 0.487 to 2.289, p=0.889) failed to show any significant superiority. CONCLUSION: The Pentax and McGrath laryngoscopes showed significantly higher emergency TI first-pass intubation success rates than the King laryngoscope when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, especially for non-expert operators. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000027925; Results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6475241 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64752412019-05-07 Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study Suzuki, Kei Kusunoki, Shinji Tanigawa, Koichi Shime, Nobuaki BMJ Open Emergency Medicine OBJECTIVE: Video laryngoscopes are used for managing difficult airways. This study compared three video laryngoscopes’ (Pentax-Airway Scope [Pentax], King Vision[King] and McGrath MAC [McGrath]) performances with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (Macintosh) as emergency tracheal intubations (TIs) reference. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The emergency department (ED) and the intensive care unit (ICU) of two Japanese tertiary-level hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: All consecutive video-recorded emergency TI cases in EDs and ICUs between December 2013 and June 2015. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary study endpoint was first-pass intubation success. A subgroup analysis examined the first-pass intubation success of expert versus non-expert operators. A logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors of first-pass intubation success. RESULTS: A total of 287 emergency TIs were included. The first-pass intubation success rates were 78%, 58%, 78% and 58% for the Pentax, King, McGrath and Macintosh instruments, respectively (p=0.004, Fisher’s exact test). The non-expert operators’ success rates were significantly higher (p=0.00004, Fisher’s exact test) for the Pentax (87%) and McGrath (78%) instruments than that for the King (50%) and Macintosh (46%) instruments, unlike that of the experts (67%, 67%, 78% and 78% for Pentax, McGrath, King and Macintosh, respectively; p=0.556, Fisher’s exact test). After TI indication, difficult airway characteristics, and expert versus non-expert operator parameters adjustments, the Pentax (OR=3.422, 95% CI 1.551 to 7.550; p=0.002) and McGrath (OR= 3.758, CI 1.640 to 8.612; p=0.002) instruments showed significantly higher first-pass intubation success odds when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (reference, OR=1). The King instrument, however, (OR=1.056; 95% CI 0.487 to 2.289, p=0.889) failed to show any significant superiority. CONCLUSION: The Pentax and McGrath laryngoscopes showed significantly higher emergency TI first-pass intubation success rates than the King laryngoscope when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, especially for non-expert operators. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000027925; Results. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6475241/ /pubmed/30928937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024927 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Emergency Medicine Suzuki, Kei Kusunoki, Shinji Tanigawa, Koichi Shime, Nobuaki Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title | Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title_full | Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title_short | Comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | comparison of three video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy for emergency endotracheal intubation: a retrospective cohort study |
topic | Emergency Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6475241/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30928937 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024927 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT suzukikei comparisonofthreevideolaryngoscopesanddirectlaryngoscopyforemergencyendotrachealintubationaretrospectivecohortstudy AT kusunokishinji comparisonofthreevideolaryngoscopesanddirectlaryngoscopyforemergencyendotrachealintubationaretrospectivecohortstudy AT tanigawakoichi comparisonofthreevideolaryngoscopesanddirectlaryngoscopyforemergencyendotrachealintubationaretrospectivecohortstudy AT shimenobuaki comparisonofthreevideolaryngoscopesanddirectlaryngoscopyforemergencyendotrachealintubationaretrospectivecohortstudy |