BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations by video laryngoscopy to that by direct laryngoscopy. METHODS: The systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were performed according the PRISMA statement. The odds ratio(OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by the Review Manager 5.2 software for dichotomous outcome. RESULTS: Eleven trials included 1425 tracheal intubations by video laryngoscopy and 1632 tracheal intubations by Macintosh laryngoscopy. Video laryngoscopy reduced the risk of erroneous esophageal intubations (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04-0.24, P < 0.00001, I2 : 0%) compared with Macintosh laryngoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that video laryngoscopy would reduce the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations by video laryngoscopy to that by direct laryngoscopy. METHODS: The systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were performed according the PRISMA statement. The odds ratio(OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by the Review Manager 5.2 software for dichotomous outcome. RESULTS: Eleven trials included 1425 tracheal intubations by video laryngoscopy and 1632 tracheal intubations by Macintosh laryngoscopy. Video laryngoscopy reduced the risk of erroneous esophageal intubations (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04-0.24, P < 0.00001, I2 : 0%) compared with Macintosh laryngoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that video laryngoscopy would reduce the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations.
Authors: Lukas E Wolf; José A Aguirre; Christian Vogt; Christian Keller; Alain Borgeat; Heinz R Bruppacher Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 2.217