Literature DB >> 29260450

The pressure exerted on the tongue during intubation with simultaneous cervical spine immobilisation: a comparison between four videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope-a manikin study.

Dawid Aleksandrowicz1, Tomasz Gaszyński2.   

Abstract

Excessive pressures exerted on the tongue during intubation may be associated with serious complications and may make intubation more difficult. The aim of this study was to evaluate five different intubating devices in the hands of experienced anaesthetists during simulated conditions of reduced cervical spine mobility. Forty senior anaesthetists participated in the study (female = 18, male = 22). The mean pressure exerted on the tongue during intubation was recorded with a standard manometer. The overall intubation success rate as well as the difference in exerted pressures between female and male anaesthetists were also assessed. The five studied devices were used by each participant and they were randomly chosen. Each anaesthetists participating in the study had over 15 years of clinical anaesthetic practice. The mean pressure exerted on the tongue during intubation was significantly lower when the videolaryngoscopes (VLs) were used (p < 0.0001 for each of the studied VL). There were failed intubation attempts with all of the studied devices, the highest failure rate was in the Airtraq® group, 10 in 40 (25%). Female anaesthetists exerted lower pressures during intubation with all studied devices (except the Airtraq®). However, the difference was only significant for the Macintosh laryngoscope (p = 0.0083). The blades of VLs exerted lower pressures on the tongue during intubation than the Macintosh laryngoscope blade. Their use may be associated with less complications. Furthermore, male anaesthetists exerted higher pressures on the soft tissues although this was neither statistically nor clinically significant. There was higher failed intubation rate in the male anaesthetist group.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical spine immobilisation; Intubation; Macintosh laryngoscope; Manikin study; Videolaryngoscope

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29260450     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-017-0095-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  24 in total

1.  Measurement of forces applied during Macintosh direct laryngoscopy compared with GlideScope® videolaryngoscopy.

Authors:  T Russell; S Khan; J Elman; R Katznelson; R M Cooper
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2012-02-21       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  [Endotracheal intubation using the Airtraq optical laryngoscope when the glottis is off-center of the viewfinder: are the options of optimization exhausted?].

Authors:  Manuel Ángel Gómez-Ríos; David Gómez-Ríos
Journal:  Rev Bras Anestesiol       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 0.964

3.  Airway scope versus macintosh laryngoscope in patients with simulated limitation of neck movements.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Aoi; Gaku Inagawa; Kyota Nakamura; Hitoshi Sato; Takayuki Kariya; Takahisa Goto
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2010-10

Review 4.  Complications of emergency tracheal intubation: immediate airway-related consequences: part II.

Authors:  Thomas C Mort
Journal:  J Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.510

5.  Laryngoscopy force, visualization, and intubation failure in acute trauma: should we modify the practice of manual in-line stabilization?

Authors:  Seth Manoach; Lorenzo Paladino
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  Manual in-line stabilization increases pressures applied by the laryngoscope blade during direct laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation.

Authors:  Brandon G Santoni; Bradley J Hindman; Christian M Puttlitz; Julie B Weeks; Nathaniel Johnson; Mazen A Maktabi; Michael M Todd
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  Randomized controlled trial of the Pentax AWS, Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in predicted difficult intubation.

Authors:  M A Malik; R Subramaniam; C H Maharaj; B H Harte; J G Laffey
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 9.166

8.  Comparison of the Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope with in-line cervical stabilization by the semisolid neck collar: manikin study.

Authors:  Kohei Takahashi; Naoto Morimura; Tetsuya Sakamoto; Takahiro Onuki; Genji Shimpuku; Rui Sato; Keiko Oda
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2010-02

9.  Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics.

Authors:  R S Cormack; J Lehane
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 10.  Manual in-line stabilization for acute airway management of suspected cervical spine injury: historical review and current questions.

Authors:  Seth Manoach; Lorenzo Paladino
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2007-03-06       Impact factor: 5.721

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.