Literature DB >> 17572317

Comparison of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh direct laryngoscope.

Fu S Xue1, Guo H Zhang, Xuan Y Li, Hai T Sun, Ping Li, Cheng W Li, Kun P Liu.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVES: To identify the hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation using a GlideScope videolaryngoscope (GSVL) in healthy adults, and to determine whether the GSVL could attenuate the hemodynamic response to orotracheal intubation compared with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (MDLS).
DESIGN: Randomized study.
SETTING: Operating room, Plastic Surgery Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China. PATIENTS: 57 adult, ASA physical status I patients, scheduled for elective plastic surgery during general anesthesia requiring orotracheal intubation.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated to either the GSVL group (n = 30) or the MDLS group (n = 27). Anesthesia was induced with intravenous injection of fentanyl 2 microg/kg, propofol 2 mg/kg, and vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg. Orotracheal intubation was started two minutes after vecuronium injection. All intubation procedures were performed by a single anesthesiologist experienced in using an MDLS and a GSVL. After intubation, anesthesia was maintained with 1% isoflurane and 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Noninvasive blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded before (baseline values) and immediately after induction (postinduction values), at intubation, and for 5 minutes at one-minute intervals. Maximal BP and HR values during the observation and intubation times were also noted. The product of HR and systolic BP (ie, the rate-pressure product [RPP]) was calculated. Intubation time was significantly longer in the GSVL group than in the MDLS group (P < 0.01). Except for maximal value of diastolic BP in the GSVL group, increases in BPs during the observation in the two groups did not significantly exceed baseline values (P > 0.05). In the GSVL group, HR and RPP at intubation were significantly higher than their baseline values, and HR increases lasted for 4 minutes. In the MDLS group, HR at intubation was also significantly higher than its baseline value, but the tachycardic response lasted only for 1 minute. During the observation, there were no significant differences between the two groups in BPs, HRs, or RPPs at any time points or in their maximal values.
CONCLUSIONS: The hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation using a GSVL and an MDLS were similar. The GSVL had no any special advantage over the MDLS in attenuating the hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17572317     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2006.11.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Anesth        ISSN: 0952-8180            Impact factor:   9.452


  23 in total

1.  Comparison of GlideScope video laryngoscopy and Macintosh laryngoscope in ear-nose and throat surgery.

Authors:  G Misirlioglu; O Sen
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  Advances in laryngoscopy: rigid indirect laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Deanne R Cheyne; Patrick Doyle
Journal:  F1000 Med Rep       Date:  2010-08-19

3.  Is resting pupil size a predictor of GAIH?

Authors:  Jinshan Shi; Ke Jiang; Bailong Hu
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 4.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation.

Authors:  Sharon R Lewis; Andrew R Butler; Joshua Parker; Tim M Cook; Andrew F Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-15

5.  Haemodynamic responses following orotracheal intubation in patients with hypertension---Macintosh direct laryngoscope versus Glidescope®videolaryngoscope.

Authors:  Tanvi M Meshram; Rashmi Ramachandran; Anjan Trikha; Vimi Rewari
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2021-04-15

6.  GlideScope Videolaryngoscopy in the Simulated Difficult Airway: Bougie vs Standard Stylet.

Authors:  Alison A Nielsen; Charity B Hope; Aaron E Bair
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2010-12

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

Authors:  Woo Jae Jeon; Kyoung Hun Kim; Jong Hoon Yeom; Mi Rang Bang; Jin-Bum Hong; Sang Yun Cho
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2011-07-21

Review 8.  Glidescope® video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Donald E G Griesdale; David Liu; James McKinney; Peter T Choi
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 5.063

9.  Comparison of hemodynamic responses to endotracheal intubation with the GlideScope video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery.

Authors:  Gökhan İnangil; Kadir Hakan Cansız; Fuat Gürbüz; Ömer Bakal; Fatma Merih Gökben; Hüseyin Şen
Journal:  Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Derg       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 0.332

10.  Haemodynamic Response to Four Different Laryngoscopes.

Authors:  Demet Altun; Achmet Ali; Emre Çamcı; Anıl Özonur; Tülay Özkan Seyhan
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2018-09-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.