Comparison of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope® videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh direct laryngoscope

Comparison of hemodynamic responses to endotracheal intubation with the GlideScope video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery

“…In our study, there was no significant difference between the GlideScope and Macintosh groups in heart rate, systolic, mean and diastolic pressures, as well as RPP during the period of five minutes after endotracheal intubation in consistence with the majority of previous studies. [20,[25][26][27] These results suggest that the passage of the tracheal tube through the vocal cords and tracheal stimulus is the main cause of the hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation. [2,22,26,28] A majority of studies have demonstrated that laryngoscopy time was significantly longer in GlideScope however we found no significant difference between the groups in our study.…”

“…Finally, a pre-curved specific stylet compatible with the 60º curve of GlideScope blade must be used and both advancement of tracheal tube and withdrawal of the stylet after intubation may cause a stimuli to the anterior commissure or anterior wall of trachea. [31] Xue et al [20] studied the GlideScope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in ASA I patients and did not found significant advantage in terms of hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation, while intubation time was significantly higher in the GlideScope group. They claimed that the manipulation of GlideScope stylet, may cause higher stimulus to the larynx and trachea, counterbalancing the lower upward lifting force required for laryngoscopy.…”

“…[19] As a result, when more lifting force is applied to optimize intubation with prolonged intubation time, a more adverse hemodynamic response is expected. [2,20] The GlideScope is a video laryngoscope designed particularly for patients with difficult airways. With the special 60º curved blade design, the GlideScope can reduce the mechanical stimulus to oropharyngeal and laryngeal structures as less upward lifting force is required to expose the glottis compared to Macintosh blade.…”

“…Our results were consistent with these studies; however, laryngoscopy time was similar in both groups in our study. Xue et al [20] reported 28.4±1.7 sec and 37.4±9.9 sec respectively for Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscopes while defining intubation time as "the period from the termination of manual ventilation using a face mask to the resuming of ventilation through a tracheal tube". Pournajafian et al [32] defined intubation time as "time from insertion of assigned intubating device into the mouth up to the time the tracheal tube positioned between vocal cords" and they reported 7.8±3.7 sec and 15.9±6.6 sec respectively for Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscopes.…”

The McGrath Series 5 video laryngoscope versus the Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomized trial in obstetric patients

“…In addition, a recent study showed that intubation times with video laryngoscopes can be decreased with proper preparation of the stylet and tracheal tube (7,27 Various studies indicated that laryngoscopy may cause an undesirable increase in blood pressure and heart rate in anesthetized patients (29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35). Various video laryngoscopes have been studied to elucidate the hemodynamic changes during orotracheal intubation; however, there has been no study comparing the hemodynamic response to orotracheal intubation of the McGrath Series 5 video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope (36)(37)(38)(39). Moreover, in one study, Jeon et al reported that the McGrath video laryngoscope led to a significant increase in systolic arterial blood pressure and heart rate compared to baseline (14).…”