BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation using GlideScope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery. METHODS: A total of 74 patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups either a GlideScope (n=37) or a Macintosh laryngoscope (n=37). Laryngoscopy time, heart rate, invasive arterial pressure and rate pressure product were compared during induction and until five minutes after laryngoscopy at 11 time points. RESULTS: Seventy patients completed the study. The intubation time was similar in both groups (14.1±4.0 sec vs. 13.2±4.2 sec; p=0.22). Hemodynamic values including heart rate, systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure and rate pressure product were similar at all-time points. The laryngoscopy time was also similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The GlideScope video laryngoscope did not show any advantage on hemodynamic response in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery when compared to Macintosh laryngoscope.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation using GlideScope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery. METHODS: A total of 74 patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups either a GlideScope (n=37) or a Macintosh laryngoscope (n=37). Laryngoscopy time, heart rate, invasive arterial pressure and rate pressure product were compared during induction and until five minutes after laryngoscopy at 11 time points. RESULTS: Seventy patients completed the study. The intubation time was similar in both groups (14.1±4.0 sec vs. 13.2±4.2 sec; p=0.22). Hemodynamic values including heart rate, systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure and rate pressure product were similar at all-time points. The laryngoscopy time was also similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The GlideScope video laryngoscope did not show any advantage on hemodynamic response in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery when compared to Macintosh laryngoscope.
Authors: David M Corda; Kevin T Riutort; Alex J Leone; Mueez K Qureshi; Michael G Heckman; Sorin J Brull Journal: J Anesth Date: 2012-03-13 Impact factor: 2.078