BACKGROUND: The Pentax AWS is a novel video laryngoscope designed to facilitate tracheal intubation by providing indirect visualization of the laryngeal inlet. We sought to compare the intubation success rate and time to intubation for the Pentax AWS and the classic Macintosh laryngoscope. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that intubation with the Pentax AWS would be easier and faster than with a standard Macintosh #4 blade in obese patients. METHODS:One hundred five obese patients (body mass index between 30 and 50 kg/m2) requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were allocated randomly to tracheal intubation with either the Macintosh (using a #4 blade) or the Pentax AWS laryngoscope. Two experienced anesthesiologists served as laryngoscopists. Intubation success rate, time to intubation, ease of intubation, and occurrence of complications were recorded. RESULTS: Intubations using the Macintosh laryngoscope and #4 blade were significantly faster than with the Pentax AWS device: half of the patients' tracheas were intubated successfully within 26 seconds with the Macintosh #4 blade, whereas the same fraction required 38 seconds with the AWS. The first-attempt success rate with the Pentax AWS was 86%; the rate increased to 90% with a second attempt. In contrast, all patients' tracheas were intubated successfully with the Macintosh #4 blade, with a first-attempt success rate of 92%, which increased to 100% by the second attempt. CONCLUSION: The time required for tracheal intubation using the Pentax AWS was longer than for the Macintosh laryngoscope and #4 blade. The AWS should not routinely be substituted for a conventional Macintosh #4 blade in morbidly obese patients.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The Pentax AWS is a novel video laryngoscope designed to facilitate tracheal intubation by providing indirect visualization of the laryngeal inlet. We sought to compare the intubation success rate and time to intubation for the Pentax AWS and the classic Macintosh laryngoscope. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that intubation with the Pentax AWS would be easier and faster than with a standard Macintosh #4 blade in obesepatients. METHODS: One hundred five obesepatients (body mass index between 30 and 50 kg/m2) requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were allocated randomly to tracheal intubation with either the Macintosh (using a #4 blade) or the Pentax AWS laryngoscope. Two experienced anesthesiologists served as laryngoscopists. Intubation success rate, time to intubation, ease of intubation, and occurrence of complications were recorded. RESULTS: Intubations using the Macintosh laryngoscope and #4 blade were significantly faster than with the Pentax AWS device: half of the patients' tracheas were intubated successfully within 26 seconds with the Macintosh #4 blade, whereas the same fraction required 38 seconds with the AWS. The first-attempt success rate with the Pentax AWS was 86%; the rate increased to 90% with a second attempt. In contrast, all patients' tracheas were intubated successfully with the Macintosh #4 blade, with a first-attempt success rate of 92%, which increased to 100% by the second attempt. CONCLUSION: The time required for tracheal intubation using the Pentax AWS was longer than for the Macintosh laryngoscope and #4 blade. The AWS should not routinely be substituted for a conventional Macintosh #4 blade in morbidly obesepatients.