Literature DB >> 28607336

Cervical spine motion during tracheal intubation with King Vision™ video laryngoscopy and conventional laryngoscopy: a crossover randomized study.

Mohamed R El-Tahan1,2, Samah El Kenany2, Alaa M Khidr3, Abdulmohsen A Al Ghamdi1, Ahmed M Tawfik4, Abdullah S Al Mulhim5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The King Vision™ (KVL) videolaryngoscope with a wide field of view could potentially reduce cervical spine motion during intubation. We aimed to compare the extent of cervical spine movement during laryngoscopy using the KVL and Macintosh laryngoscopes.
METHODS: Following ethical approval, 29 patients with a normal cervical spine requiring general anesthesia and tracheal intubation were randomly subjected to both KVL and Macintosh laryngoscopy in a crossover. Cervical spine motion during each laryngoscopy was radiologically examined by measuring changes in cumulative spine motion and changes from the neutral position in the C0-C5 angles formed by the adjacent vertebrae. Time to tracheal intubation, laryngoscopic view, and ease of intubation were also recorded.
RESULTS: Compared with direct laryngoscopy, the KVL resulted in significantly less movement of the C-spine at the C0-C1, and C3-C4, C4-C5 segments (mean differences: C0-C1: 3.01 ° [95% CI: -4.74° to -1.28°]; C3-C4: 1.81° [95% CI: -3.19° to -0.43°]; C4-C5: -0.88° [95% CI: -1.61° to -0.19°], P<0.02) and cumulative C-spine movement (mean 36.1˚[95% CI 32.72 to 39.51] vs. 44.1˚[95%CI: 39.54 to 48.75]; P=0.001). There was significant movement in the C0-C3 segment from baseline using both devices. Tracheal intubation took longer with KVL (mean difference: 12.7 s [95% CI: 9.15 to 16.13 s]; P=0.001) even though laryngeal visualization was improved (Cormack Lehane Grade I was reported in 100% KVL vs. 65.5% Macintosh laryngoscopies; P=0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with normal cervical spine, KVL resulted in less extension of the cervical spine than direct laryngoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28607336     DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11913-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Minerva Anestesiol        ISSN: 0375-9393            Impact factor:   3.051


  4 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Tracheal intubation with King Vision video laryngoscope in patients with cervical spine instability-Comparison of straight versus curved reinforced endotracheal tubes.

Authors:  Nisha Patel; Devyani J Desai
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2021-10-08

3.  Randomized crossover trial comparing cervical spine motion during tracheal intubation with a Macintosh laryngoscope versus a C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope in a simulated immobilized cervical spine.

Authors:  Hyesun Paik; Hee-Pyoung Park
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2020-08-15       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 4.  Comparisons of Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation Undergoing General Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Juncheol Lee; Youngsuk Cho; Wonhee Kim; Kyu-Sun Choi; Bo-Hyoung Jang; Hyungoo Shin; Chiwon Ahn; Jae Guk Kim; Min Kyun Na; Tae Ho Lim; Dong Won Kim
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-02-26
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.