Literature DB >> 28539007

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in children (excluding neonates).

Ibtihal S Abdelgadir1, Robert S Phillips2, Davinder Singh3, Michael P Moncreiff4, Joanne L Lumsden5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Direct laryngoscopy is the method currently used for tracheal intubation in children. It occasionally offers unexpectedly poor laryngeal views. Indirect laryngoscopy involves visualizing the vocal cords by means other than obtaining a direct sight, with the potential to improve outcomes. We reviewed the current available literature and performed a meta-analysis to compare direct versus indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, with regards to efficacy and adverse effects.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, versus direct laryngoscopy for intubation of children with regards to intubation time, number of attempts at intubation, and adverse haemodynamic responses to endotracheal intubation. We also assessed other adverse responses to intubation, such as trauma to oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal structures, and we assessed vocal cord view scores. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and trial registers (www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlledtrials) in November 2015. We reran the search in January 2017. We added new studies of potential interest to a list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will incorporate them into formal review findings during the review update. We performed reference checking and citation searching and contacted the authors of unpublished data to ask for more information. We applied no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomized controlled trials. Participants were children aged 28 days to 18 years. Investigators performed intubations using any type of indirect laryngoscopes, or videolaryngoscopes, versus direct laryngoscopes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used Cochrane standard methodological procedures. Two review authors independently reviewed titles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 12 studies (803 children) in this review and meta-analysis. We identified three studies that are awaiting classification and two ongoing studies.Trial results show that a longer intubation time was required when indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, was used instead of direct laryngoscopy (12 trials; n = 798; mean difference (MD) 5.49 seconds, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37 to 9.60; I2 = 90%; very low-quality evidence). Researchers found no significant differences between direct and indirect laryngoscopy on assessment of success of the first attempt at intubation (11 trials; n = 749; risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.02; I2 = 67%; low-quality evidence) and observed that unsuccessful intubation (five trials; n = 263) was significantly increased in the indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, group (RR 4.93, 95% CI 1.33 to 18.31; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). Five studies reported the effect of intubation on oxygen saturation (n = 272; very low-quality evidence). Five children had desaturation during intubation: one from the direct laryngoscopy group and four from the indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, group.Two studies (n = 100) reported other haemodynamic responses to intubation (very low-quality evidence). One study reported a significant increase in heart rate five minutes after intubation in the indirect laryngoscopy group (P = 0.007); the other study found that the heart rate change in the direct laryngoscopy group was significantly less than the heart rate change in the indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, group (P < 0.001). A total of five studies (n = 244; very low-quality evidence) looked at evidence of trauma resulting from intubation. Investigators reported that only two children from the direct laryngoscopy group had trauma compared with no children in the indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, group.Use of indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, improved the percentage of glottic opening (five trials; n = 256). Studies noted no significant difference in Cormack and Lehane score (C&L) grade 1 (three trials; n = 190; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21; I2 = 59%). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, leads to prolonged intubation time with an increased rate of intubation failure when compared with direct laryngoscopy (very low-quality evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency, and study limitations). Review authors had difficulty reaching conclusions on adverse haemodynamic responses and other adverse effects of intubation, as only a few children were reported to have these outcomes. Use of indirect laryngoscopy, or videolaryngoscopy, might lead to improved vocal cord view, but marked heterogeneity between studies made it difficult for review authors to reach conclusions on this outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28539007      PMCID: PMC6481531          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011413.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  41 in total

Review 1.  Can we make airway management (even) safer?--lessons from national audit.

Authors:  N Woodall; C Frerk; T M Cook
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  Expected difficult tracheal intubation: a prospective comparison of direct laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy in 200 patients.

Authors:  A Jungbauer; M Schumann; V Brunkhorst; A Börgers; H Groeben
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 9.166

Review 3.  How did the Macintosh laryngoscope become so popular?

Authors:  Jeanette Scott; Paul A Baker
Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.556

Review 4.  Airtraq laryngoscope versus conventional Macintosh laryngoscope: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Y Lu; H Jiang; Y S Zhu
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 6.955

5.  Meta-analysis: principles and procedures.

Authors:  M Egger; G D Smith; A N Phillips
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-12-06

Review 6.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in neonates.

Authors:  Krithika Lingappan; Jennifer L Arnold; Thomas L Shaw; Caraciolo J Fernandes; Mohan Pammi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-02-18

Review 7.  Videolaryngoscopes in pediatric anesthesia: what's new?

Authors:  J E Fiadjoe; P Kovatsis
Journal:  Minerva Anestesiol       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Validation of the GlideScope video laryngoscope in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Andreas Redel; Funda Karademir; Anett Schlitterlau; Matthias Frommer; Lars-Uwe Scholtz; Peter Kranke; Franz Kehl; Norbert Roewer; Markus Lange
Journal:  Paediatr Anaesth       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.556

Review 9.  Glidescope® video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Donald E G Griesdale; David Liu; James McKinney; Peter T Choi
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 5.063

10.  SWIVIT--Swiss video-intubation trial evaluating video-laryngoscopes in a simulated difficult airway scenario: study protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial in Switzerland.

Authors:  Lorenz Theiler; Kristina Hermann; Patrick Schoettker; Georges Savoldelli; Natalie Urwyler; Maren Kleine-Brueggeney; Kristopher L Arheart; Robert Greif
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  16 in total

1.  Apneic Oxygenation As a Quality Improvement Intervention in an Academic PICU.

Authors:  Natalie Napolitano; Elizabeth K Laverriere; Nancy Craig; Megan Snyder; Allison Thompson; Daniela Davis; Sholeen Nett; Aline Branca; Ilana Harwayne-Gidansky; Ron Sanders; Justine Shults; Vinay Nadkarni; Akira Nishisaki
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.624

Review 2.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in children (excluding neonates).

Authors:  Ibtihal S Abdelgadir; Robert S Phillips; Davinder Singh; Michael P Moncreiff; Joanne L Lumsden
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-05-24

3.  A Convolutional Neural Network for Real Time Classification, Identification, and Labelling of Vocal Cord and Tracheal Using Laryngoscopy and Bronchoscopy Video.

Authors:  Clyde Matava; Evelina Pankiv; Sam Raisbeck; Monica Caldeira; Fahad Alam
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 4.460

4.  Process conformance is associated with successful first intubation attempt and lower odds of adverse events in a paediatric emergency setting.

Authors:  Karen J O'Connell; Sen Yang; Megan Cheng; Alexis B Sandler; Niall H Cochrane; JaeWon Yang; Rachel B Webman; Ivan Marsic; Randall Burd
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2019-07-18       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 5.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Authors:  Jan Hansel; Andrew M Rogers; Sharon R Lewis; Tim M Cook; Andrew F Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-04-04

Review 6.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation.

Authors:  Sharon R Lewis; Andrew R Butler; Joshua Parker; Tim M Cook; Andrew F Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-15

7.  Conceptualizing intubation sharing: A descriptive qualitative study of videolaryngoscopy for pediatric emergency airway management.

Authors:  Kelsey A Miller; Ashley Marchese; Donna Luff; Joshua Nagler
Journal:  AEM Educ Train       Date:  2021-04-01

8.  Evaluation of performance of C-MAC® video laryngoscope Miller blade size zero for endotracheal intubation in preterm and ex-preterm infants: A retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Renu Sinha; Kanil Ranjith Kumar; Ram Kumar Kalaiyarasan; Puneet Khanna; Bikash Ranjan Ray; Ravinder Kumar Pandey; Jyotsna Punj; Vanlal Darlong
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2019-04

9.  A systematic review of meta-analyses comparing direct laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopy.

Authors:  Andrew W Downey; Laura V Duggan; J Adam Law
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 6.713

10.  Novel airway device Vie Scope in several pediatric airway scenario: A randomized simulation pilot trial.

Authors:  Maciej Maslanka; Lukasz Szarpak; Sanchit Ahuja; Kurt Ruetzler; Jacek Smereka
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.