Mohamed R El-Tahan1, Alaa M Khidr2, Ihab S Gaarour2, Saeed A Alshadwi2, Talal M Alghamdi2, Abdulmohsen Al'ghamdi2. 1. Anesthesiology Department, King Fahd Hospital of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (formerly University of Dammam), Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: mohamedrefaateltahan@yahoo.com. 2. Anesthesiology Department, King Fahd Hospital of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (formerly University of Dammam), Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that laryngoscopy using the Airtraq (Prodol Limited, Viscaya, Spain) or King Vision laryngoscope (KVL) (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) would result in a shorter time for successful double-lumen endobronchial tube (DLT) intubation by users with mixed experience than the time required using the Macintosh or GlideScope (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA) laryngoscopes. DESIGN: A randomized, prospective, blind study. SETTING: A single university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 133 patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated into the following 4 groups of DLTs: Macintosh (n = 32), GlideScope (n = 34), Airtraq (n = 35), or KVL (n = 32). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The following data were recorded: time required for achieving successful DLT intubation; glottis visualization; optimization maneuvers; first-pass success rate; intubation difficulty; failure to intubate, defined as an attempt taking >150 seconds to perform or if peripheral oxygen saturation <92% was noted; and postoperative sore throat and hoarseness were recorded. Compared with GlideScope, the Airtraq resulted in shorter times for achieving successful DLT intubation (median times: 21 s [95% confidence interval 23.9-70.8 s] v 57.5 s [95% confidence interval 46.2-89.1 s], respectively; p = 0.021); a lower score for difficult intubations (p = 0.023); and fewer optimization maneuvers. The 4 laryngoscopes were associated with comparable glottis visualization; first-pass success rate (100%, 100%, 94.4%, and 100%, respectively; p = 0.522); incidence of oropharyngeal trauma; postoperative sore throat; and hoarseness of voice. There were 2 (5.7%) endobronchial intubation failures using the Airtraq due to the inability to advance the DLT through the glottis opening. The experience of the anesthesiologists in using the 4 devices had a statistically significant negative correlation with the time to confirmation of endobronchial intubation (Spearman r -0.392; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: When used by operators with mixed experience, the channeled Airtraq required less time for DLT intubation and was easier to use than the GlideScope, although failures did occur with the Airtraq, whereas they did not occur with the other systems.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that laryngoscopy using the Airtraq (Prodol Limited, Viscaya, Spain) or King Vision laryngoscope (KVL) (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) would result in a shorter time for successful double-lumen endobronchial tube (DLT) intubation by users with mixed experience than the time required using the Macintosh or GlideScope (Verathon Inc., Bothell, WA) laryngoscopes. DESIGN: A randomized, prospective, blind study. SETTING: A single university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 133 patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomly allocated into the following 4 groups of DLTs: Macintosh (n = 32), GlideScope (n = 34), Airtraq (n = 35), or KVL (n = 32). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The following data were recorded: time required for achieving successful DLT intubation; glottis visualization; optimization maneuvers; first-pass success rate; intubation difficulty; failure to intubate, defined as an attempt taking >150 seconds to perform or if peripheral oxygen saturation <92% was noted; and postoperative sore throat and hoarseness were recorded. Compared with GlideScope, the Airtraq resulted in shorter times for achieving successful DLT intubation (median times: 21 s [95% confidence interval 23.9-70.8 s] v 57.5 s [95% confidence interval 46.2-89.1 s], respectively; p = 0.021); a lower score for difficult intubations (p = 0.023); and fewer optimization maneuvers. The 4 laryngoscopes were associated with comparable glottis visualization; first-pass success rate (100%, 100%, 94.4%, and 100%, respectively; p = 0.522); incidence of oropharyngeal trauma; postoperative sore throat; and hoarseness of voice. There were 2 (5.7%) endobronchial intubation failures using the Airtraq due to the inability to advance the DLT through the glottis opening. The experience of the anesthesiologists in using the 4 devices had a statistically significant negative correlation with the time to confirmation of endobronchial intubation (Spearman r -0.392; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: When used by operators with mixed experience, the channeled Airtraq required less time for DLT intubation and was easier to use than the GlideScope, although failures did occur with the Airtraq, whereas they did not occur with the other systems.
Authors: Katarzyna Karczewska; Szymon Bialka; Jacek Smereka; Maciej Cyran; Grazyna Nowak-Starz; Jaroslaw Chmielewski; Michal Pruc; Pawel Wieczorek; Frank William Peacock; Jerzy Robert Ladny; Lukasz Szarpak Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-11-25 Impact factor: 4.241