Pentax-AWS videolaryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation in patients with difficult airways

Moon, Eun Jin; Kim, Mi-Kyeong; Kim, Keon Sik

doi:10.4097/kjae.2013.64.1.87

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even doctors and dentists who do not usually perform tracheal intubation in the course of their daily clinical practice can reportedly perform rapid tracheal intubation with orotracheal intubation using AWS [ 6 ], thereby firmly establishing the usefulness of AWS in orotracheal intubation. However, there are published recommendations to use AWS for nasotracheal intubation (routine nasotracheal intubation for 103 patients in Maxillofacial hospital [ 7 ], meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial [ 8 ], and case series for nasotracheal intubation in patients with difficult airways [ 9 ]. Also there is a report which describes that the AWS offers better intubation conditions than the ML during nasotracheal intubatin [ 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The usefulness of the McGrath MAC laryngoscope in comparison with Airwayscope and Macintosh laryngoscope during routine nasotracheal intubation: a randomaized controlled trial

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMcGrath MAC video laryngoscope offers excellent laryngosopic views and increases the success rate of orotracheal intubation in some cases. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of McGrath MAC for routine nasotracheal intubation by comparing McGrath MAC with Airway scope and Macintosh laryngoscope.MethodsA total of 60 adult patients with ASA physical status class 1 or 2, aged 20–70 years were enrolled in this study. Patients were scheduled for elective oral surgery under general anesthesia with nasotracheal intubation. Exclusion criteria included lack of consent and expected difficult airway. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups: McGrath MAC (n = 20), Airway scope (n = 20), and Macintosh laryngoscope (n = 20). After induction, nasotracheal intubation was performed by six expert anesthesiologists with more than 6 years of experience.ResultsThere were no significant differences in preoperative airway assessment among the three groups. Successful tracheal intubation time was 26.8 ± 5.7 (mean ± standard deviation) s for McGrath MAC, 36.4 ± 11.0 s for Airway scope, and 36.5 ± 8.9 s for Macintosh laryngoscope groups. The time for successful tracheal intubation for McGrath MAC group was significantly shorter than that for Airway scope and Macintosh laryngoscope (p < 0.01). McGrath MAC significantly improved the Cormack Lehane grade for nasotracheal intubation compared with Macintosh laryngoscope (p < 0.05).ConclusionMcGrath MAC significantly facilitates routine nasotracheal intubation compared with Airwayscope and Macintosh laryngoscope by shortening the tracheal intubation time and improving the Cormack Lehane grade.Trial registrationUMINCTR Registration number UMIN000023506. Registered 5 Aug 2016.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The usefulness of the McGrath MAC laryngoscope in comparison with Airwayscope and Macintosh laryngoscope during routine nasotracheal intubation: a randomaized controlled trial

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nasotracheal intubation of a patient with restricted mouth opening using a McGrath MAC X-Blade and Magill forceps

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We experienced a case of successful nasotracheal intubation using the X-Blade of the McGrath MAC in a 28-year-old woman with a 2.5-cm mouth opening. She had no teeth on the right side, her neck movement was limited, her mandibular protrusion was grade C, and her Mallampati could not be evaluated. Her tongue was fixed to the left wall during a previous surgery. We evaluated the awake glottic view using the McGrath MAC X-Blade and topical oral anesthesia. We obtained a Cormack-Lehane grade II view and then decided to administer general anesthesia. Intubation was attempted with a Macintosh laryngoscope, but we could not insert the scope deeply enough and there was no area in which to insert the Magill forceps or endotracheal tube. We then used the X-Blade 3 of the McGrath MAC and obtained a sufficient area in which to insert the tube and manipulate the Magill forceps. A laryngoscopic view was achieved in 7 s and nasotracheal intubation was performed in 16 s with a 7.0-mm spiral tube using the Magill forceps. McGrath MAC X-Blade can be used with the Magill forceps in patients with restricted mouth opening with careful patient selection, in experienced hands.

show abstract

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Jiang

et al. 2019

Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pentax-AWS videolaryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation in patients with difficult airways

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

The usefulness of the McGrath MAC laryngoscope in comparison with Airwayscope and Macintosh laryngoscope during routine nasotracheal intubation: a randomaized controlled trial

The usefulness of the McGrath MAC laryngoscope in comparison with Airwayscope and Macintosh laryngoscope during routine nasotracheal intubation: a randomaized controlled trial

Nasotracheal intubation of a patient with restricted mouth opening using a McGrath MAC X-Blade and Magill forceps

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About