J-H Sui1, P Mao, J-H Liu, S-Y Tong, L-X Wei, D Yang, X-M Deng. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medicine Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because the Bonfils fibrescope has a semi-rigid optical stylet and is similar in shape to a lightwand, we aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of transillumination-assisted orotracheal intubation with the Bonfils fibrescope and the Trachlight(TM) lightwand in patients with normal airways. METHODS: As a preliminary investigation to form a basis for later studies, therefore, we performed a randomized, single-blind study of 300 patients with normal airways to compare the efficiency of Trachlight and transillumination-assisted Bonfils orotracheal intubation in these patients. In both groups, orotracheal intubation was performed using a transillumination technique. The first attempt and overall success rates of tracheal intubation, the times required, and any untoward effects were recorded. RESULTS: Although the overall success rates were similar for Bonfils and Trachlight intubations (97.3% and 98.7%, respectively), tracheal intubation was successful on the first attempt in 87.3% of patients with the Bonfils fibrescope compared with 95.3% of patients with the Trachlight (P < 0.05). The mean intubation time for the first attempt was 15 ± 5 s with the Bonfils fibrescope and 9 ± 2 s with the Trachlight (P < 0.001). Patients intubated using the Bonfils fibrescope also experienced significantly more sore throat and hoarseness than those intubated using the Trachlight. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with normal airways, the Trachlight is superior for orotracheal intubation with respect to reliability, rapidity, and safety compared with the Bonfils fibrescope used with the transillumination technique.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Because the Bonfils fibrescope has a semi-rigid optical stylet and is similar in shape to a lightwand, we aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of transillumination-assisted orotracheal intubation with the Bonfils fibrescope and the Trachlight(TM) lightwand in patients with normal airways. METHODS: As a preliminary investigation to form a basis for later studies, therefore, we performed a randomized, single-blind study of 300 patients with normal airways to compare the efficiency of Trachlight and transillumination-assisted Bonfils orotracheal intubation in these patients. In both groups, orotracheal intubation was performed using a transillumination technique. The first attempt and overall success rates of tracheal intubation, the times required, and any untoward effects were recorded. RESULTS: Although the overall success rates were similar for Bonfils and Trachlight intubations (97.3% and 98.7%, respectively), tracheal intubation was successful on the first attempt in 87.3% of patients with the Bonfils fibrescope compared with 95.3% of patients with the Trachlight (P < 0.05). The mean intubation time for the first attempt was 15 ± 5 s with the Bonfils fibrescope and 9 ± 2 s with the Trachlight (P < 0.001). Patients intubated using the Bonfils fibrescope also experienced significantly more sore throat and hoarseness than those intubated using the Trachlight. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with normal airways, the Trachlight is superior for orotracheal intubation with respect to reliability, rapidity, and safety compared with the Bonfils fibrescope used with the transillumination technique.