Literature DB >> 25062740

Comparison of the laryngoscopy views with the size 1 Miller and Macintosh laryngoscope blades lifting the epiglottis or the base of the tongue in infants and children <2 yr of age.

Y Passi1, M Sathyamoorthy1, J Lerman2, C Heard3, M Marino1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Miller laryngoscope blades are preferred for laryngoscopy in infants and children <2 yr of age. Despite their long history, the laryngeal view with the Miller blade size 1 has never been compared with that with the Macintosh (MAC) blade in children. This prospective, single-blinded, randomized study was designed to compare the laryngeal views with the size 1 Miller and MAC blades in children <2 yr.
METHODS: With IRB approval, 50 ASA I and II children <2 yr undergoing elective surgery were enrolled. After an inhalation induction and neuromuscular block with i.v. rocuronium 0.5 mg kg(-1), two laryngeal views were obtained with a single blade (Miller or MAC) in each child: one lifting the epiglottis and another lifting the tongue base. The best laryngeal views in each blade position were photographed with a SONY(®) Cyber-shot camera and rated by a blinded anaesthesiologist using the percentage of glottic opening scale.
RESULTS: The scores with the Miller blade lifting the epiglottis and the MAC blade lifting the tongue base were similar. The scores with the Miller blade lifting the epiglottis and the tongue base were similar. The scores for the MAC blade lifting the tongue base were greater than those lifting the epiglottis (95% confidence interval: 7.6-26.8) (P=0.0004).
CONCLUSIONS: In infants and children <2 yr of age, optimal laryngeal views may be obtained with either the Miller size 1 blade lifting the epiglottis or with the Miller or MAC blades lifting the tongue base. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01717872 at Clinical Trials.gov.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  age groups; child, infant; equipment, laryngoscopes; larynx, laryngoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25062740     DOI: 10.1093/bja/aeu228

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Anaesth        ISSN: 0007-0912            Impact factor:   9.166


  5 in total

1.  Comparison between Macintosh, Miller and McCoy laryngoscope blade size 2 in paediatric patients - A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Pratishtha Yadav; Sudeshna Bhar Kundu; Dhurjoti P Bhattacharjee
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2019-01

2.  Comparison of the TruView PCD video laryngoscope and macintosh laryngoscope for pediatric tracheal intubation by novice paramedics: a randomized crossover simulation trial.

Authors:  Łukasz Szarpak; Łukasz Czyżewski; Andrzej Kurowski; Zenon Truszewski
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 3.183

3.  A comparison of two hyperangulated video laryngoscope blades to direct laryngoscopy in a simulated infant airway: a bicentric, comparative, randomized manikin study.

Authors:  Marc Kriege; Nina Pirlich; Thomas Ott; Eva Wittenmeier; Frank Dette
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2018-08-31       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  Improvement of laryngoscopic view by hand-assisted elevation and caudad traction of the shoulder during tracheal intubation in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Jin Hee Ahn; Doyeon Kim; Nam-Su Gil; Yong Hun Son; Bong Gyu Seong; Ji Seon Jeong
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  An infant's airway: A difficult terrain.

Authors:  Zahid Hussain Khan
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.