Literature DB >> 25886716

Improvement in glottic visualisation by using the C-MAC PM video laryngoscope as a first-line device for out-of-hospital emergency tracheal intubation: An observational study.

Bjoern Hossfeld1, Kristina Frey, Volker Doerges, Lorenz Lampl, Matthias Helm.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital tracheal intubation is associated with life-threatening complications. To date, no study has compared direct and video laryngoscopic views simultaneously in the same patients in an out-of-hospital setting.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of C-MAC PM video laryngoscope on laryngeal view, compared with direct laryngoscopy, and to estimate possible consequences for patient safety.
DESIGN: An observational, single-centre study.
SETTING: Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) 'CHRISTOPH 22', Ulm, Germany. PATIENTS: Two-hundrend and twenty-eight emergency patients undergoing airway management out of hospital.
INTERVENTIONS: Laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation using C-MAC PM video laryngoscope. For all intubations, the HEMS physician used CMAC PM as the first-line device and performed an initial direct laryngoscopy followed by a video laryngoscopy, without changing the laryngoscope blade. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The difference in laryngeal view was recorded as well as the number of intubation attempts along with the success rate and difficulties in airway management. Improvement in glottic visualisation from Cormack and Lehane grade III/IV to I/II was rated as being clinically relevant.
RESULTS: During a 20-month study period, a total of 228 out-of-hospital emergency patients requiring tracheal intubation were included. The overall success rate in securing the airway was 100%. For 226 patients (99.1%), tracheal intubation was successful with two or fewer attempts. For comparison of direct and indirect laryngoscopic views, five patients were excluded because of the use of an indirect laryngoscope blade. Of 223 patients, 120 had a glottic view rated as Cormack and Lehane grade II to IV with direct laryngoscopy; in these patients, visualisation of the glottis was significantly improved with the C-MAC PM video laryngoscope (P < 0.001). In 56 patients (25.1%), improvement of glottic visualisation was clinically relevant (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Use of the C-MAC PM video laryngoscope is associated with improved visualisation of the glottis according to the Cormack and Lehane grading system and an excellent success rate for out-of-hospital tracheal intubation. These results suggest that the use of C-MAC PM as a first-line device for tracheal intubation by out-of-hospital emergency medical services is a safe procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25886716     DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol        ISSN: 0265-0215            Impact factor:   4.330


  14 in total

1.  [Airway management in preclinical emergency anesthesia with respect to specialty and education].

Authors:  A Luckscheiter; T Lohs; M Fischer; W Zink
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  Comparing McGRATH® MAC, C-MAC®, and Macintosh Laryngoscopes Operated by Medical Students: A Randomized, Crossover, Manikin Study.

Authors:  Myungju Shin; Sun Joon Bai; Ki-Young Lee; Ein Oh; Hyun Joo Kim
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 3.  Current evidence for the use of C-MAC videolaryngoscope in adult airway management: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Fu-Shan Xue; Hui-Xian Li; Ya-Yang Liu; Gui-Zhen Yang
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2017-07-03       Impact factor: 2.423

Review 4.  Recent trends in airway management.

Authors:  Joelle Karlik; Michael Aziz
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2017-02-17

5.  Prospective Trial to Compare Direct and Indirect Laryngoscopy Using C-MAC PM® with Macintosh Blade and D-Blade® in a Simulated Difficult Airway.

Authors:  Florian Jürgen Raimann; Philipp Edmund Dietze; Colleen Elizabeth Cuca; Dirk Meininger; Paul Kessler; Christian Byhahn; Daniel Gill-Schuster; Kai Zacharowski; Haitham Mutlak
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 1.112

6.  Analysis of tracheal intubation in out-of-hospital helicopter emergency medicine recorded by video laryngoscopy.

Authors:  Jürgen Knapp; Bettina Eberle; Michael Bernhard; Lorenz Theiler; Urs Pietsch; Roland Albrecht
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 2.953

7.  Hands-Off Time for Endotracheal Intubation during CPR Is Not Altered by the Use of the C-MAC Video-Laryngoscope Compared to Conventional Direct Laryngoscopy. A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study.

Authors:  Philipp Schuerner; Bastian Grande; Tobias Piegeler; Martin Schlaepfer; Leif Saager; Matthew T Hutcherson; Donat R Spahn; Kurt Ruetzler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Comparing Four Video Laryngoscopes and One Optical Laryngoscope with a Standard Macintosh Blade in a Simulated Trapped Car Accident Victim.

Authors:  Florian J Raimann; Daniel M Tepperis; Dirk Meininger; Kai Zacharowski; Richard Schalk; Christian Byhahn; Christian F Weber; Haitham Mutlak
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 1.112

9.  Comparison of videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy by German paramedics during out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation; an observational prospective study.

Authors:  Joachim Risse; Christian Volberg; Thomas Kratz; Birgit Plöger; Andreas Jerrentrup; Dirk Pabst; Clemens Kill
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2020-03-23

10.  Canadian Airway Focus Group updated consensus-based recommendations for management of the difficult airway: part 1. Difficult airway management encountered in an unconscious patient.

Authors:  J Adam Law; Laura V Duggan; Mathieu Asselin; Paul Baker; Edward Crosby; Andrew Downey; Orlando R Hung; Philip M Jones; François Lemay; Rudiger Noppens; Matteo Parotto; Roanne Preston; Nick Sowers; Kathryn Sparrow; Timothy P Turkstra; David T Wong; George Kovacs
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 5.063

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.