Literature DB >> 32152886

Direct versus indirect laryngoscopy using a Macintosh video laryngoscope: a mannequin study comparing applied forces.

Joanna K Gordon1,2, Vaughan E Bertram3, Francesco Cavallin4, Matteo Parotto3, Richard M Cooper3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Upper airway injury and sympathetic activation may be related to the forces applied during laryngoscopy. We compared the applied forces during laryngoscopy using direct and indirect visualization of a standardized mannequin glottis.
METHODS: Force transducers were applied to the concave surface of a GlideScope T-MAC Macintosh-style video laryngoscope that can also be used as a conventional direct-view laryngoscope. Thirty-four anesthesiologists performed four laryngoscopies (two direct and two indirect views) on an Ambu mannequin in a randomized sequence. During each laryngoscopy, participants were instructed to obtain views corresponding to > 80% and 50% of the glottic opening aperture. Peak and impulse forces were measured for each view.
RESULTS: To achieve a 50% glottic opening view, the top 10th percentile force was higher with direct vs indirect laryngoscopy in terms of peak (difference, 9.1 newton; 99% confidence interval [CI], 7.4 to 13.9) and impulse (difference, 56.4 newton·sec; 99% CI, 49.0 to 81.7) forces. To achieve >80% view of the glottic opening, median force was higher with direct vs indirect laryngoscopy in terms of peak (difference, 3.6 newton; 99% CI, 1.6 to 7.3) and impulse (difference, 20.4 newton·sec; 99% CI, 11.7 to 35.1) forces.
CONCLUSIONS: In this mannequin study, lower forces applied during indirect vs direct laryngoscopy may reflect an advantage of video laryngoscopy, but additional studies using patients are required to confirm the clinical implications of these findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32152886     DOI: 10.1007/s12630-020-01583-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Anaesth        ISSN: 0832-610X            Impact factor:   5.063


  1 in total

1.  Force and torque vary between laryngoscopists and laryngoscope blades.

Authors:  R H Hastings; E D Hon; C Nghiem; E A Wahrenbrock
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 5.108

  1 in total
  3 in total

1.  A comparative study of glottis visualization according to the method of lifting the epiglottis in video laryngoscopy: indirect and direct lifting methods.

Authors:  Ji Youn Oh; Ji Hye Lee; Yu Yil Kim; Seung Min Baek; Da Wa Jung; Ji Hun Park
Journal:  Anesth Pain Med (Seoul)       Date:  2021-04-08

2.  Role of videolaryngoscope in the management of difficult airway in adults: A survey.

Authors:  A H Shruthi; Deevish Dinakara; Y R Chandrika
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2020-10-01

3.  Direct vs. Video-Laryngoscopy for Intubation by Paramedics of Simulated COVID-19 Patients under Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Authors:  Leszek Gadek; Lukasz Szarpak; Lars Konge; Marek Dabrowski; Dominika Telecka-Gadek; Maciej Maslanka; Wiktoria Laura Drela; Marta Jachowicz; Lukasz Iskrzycki; Szymon Bialka; Frank William Peacock; Jacek Smereka
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 4.241

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.