Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial

Ozdemirkan, Aysun; Önal, Özkan; Ozcan, Irem Gumus; Aslanlar, Emine; Saltali, Ali; Sarı, Mehmet Yusuf; Ciftci, Cansu; Bayram, Hasan Hüseyin

doi:10.1016/j.bjane.2021.04.027

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The overall intubation success rate was 98.1%, and the first-attempt success rates were not significantly different between Group UE (96.2%) and Group MedAn (98.1%). These results are consistent with those of a previous study [ 20 ]. In Group UE, intubation failed in 1 patient with a long U-shaped epiglottis because it was difficult to lift the epiglottis indirectly with UE ( Figure 3A ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of MedAn with the Nishikawa Blade and UE Videolaryngoscopes for Left-Sided Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zhang,

Wang

et al. 2023

Med Sci Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the MedAn videolaryngoscope with the Nishikawa blade (MedAn) vs the UE videolaryngoscope (UE) for intubation with a left-sided double-lumen endobronchial tube (LDLT) in patients with normal airways. Material/Methods We randomly categorized 106 patients scheduled to undergo elective thoracic surgery with LDLT for one-lung ventilation into 2 groups: the UE group (Group UE) and the MedAn group (Group MedAn), using the MedAn or UE for LDLT intubation. The primary outcome was time to successful intubation. The Cormack-Lehane classification of laryngeal view was the key secondary outcome. Other secondary outcomes included first-attempt and overall intubation success rates, laryngoscopy time, LDLT placement time, operators’ subjective evaluation of videolaryngoscopes, hemodynamic changes during videolaryngoscopic intubation, and adverse outcomes. Results The time to successful intubation and LDLT placement time of Group MedAn were 42.0 (32.35, 47.0) s and 23.0 (18.0, 26.0) s, and it was shorter than in Group UE (median, 42 s vs 49 s, 23 s vs 30 s, P <0.001). Group MedAn had a better laryngeal view ( P =0.03) and less subglottic/tracheal mucosal injury ( P <0.001) than Group UE. Moreover, the operators’ subjective grading of ease of laryngoscopy, quality of view, and ease of LDLT placement were higher in Group MedAn than in Group UE ( P <0.05). Conclusions Compared with the UE, the MedAn could reduce the intubation time and provide a better laryngeal view and sufficient intubation space for safer LDLT intubation in patients with normal airways.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…LDLT intubation includes 2 key steps: obtaining a laryngeal view and inserting the tip of the bronchial tube through the vocal cords [ 20 ]. Therefore, a clear laryngeal view with enough intubation space during laryngoscopy is crucial for LDLT placement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of MedAn with the Nishikawa Blade and UE Videolaryngoscopes for Left-Sided Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zhang,

Wang

et al. 2023

Med Sci Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, laryngoscopy and intubation are two separate procedures and require different troubleshooting techniques when difficulty is encountered. The recent prospective trial published by Ozdemirkan and colleagues 4 randomized patients with difficult airways (i.e., failed direct laryngoscopy on the first attempt) to either a laryngoscopy enhancement (i.e., the McGrath video laryngoscope) or an intubation enhancement (i.e. the Frova intubating catheter with a coude tip in conjunction with direct laryngoscopy) for the second attempt.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Letter to the Editor regarding “Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial.” Braz J Anesthesiol. 2022;72(1):55-62

Müller¹

2023

Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (English Edition)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We thank Dr. Muller for his interest in our study and the Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Schmidt, for allowing us to reply to the letter written about our article. 1 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In response to the letter to the editor regarding “Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial”

Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial

Cited by 4 publications

References 26 publications

Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of MedAn with the Nishikawa Blade and UE Videolaryngoscopes for Left-Sided Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of MedAn with the Nishikawa Blade and UE Videolaryngoscopes for Left-Sided Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Letter to the Editor regarding “Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial.” Braz J Anesthesiol. 2022;72(1):55-62

In response to the letter to the editor regarding “Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About