Clinical study of conventional or video-laryngoscope use. A comparison of the laryngoscopy views [Greek]
Authors: Amaniti A, Chatziioakimidis Ch, Iordanidou S, Papalexi E, Ntonas G, Pourzitaki Ch, Konstantinidis D, Gorgias N
Number of views: 331
The aim of our study was to compare video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy views, and the resultant intubation conditions as well, provided by video or conventional laryngoscope respectively, in patients receiving general anaesthesia for elective surgery. One hundred patients, with no expected difficult airway, were randomly allocated to undergo tracheal intubation with the Macintosh video laryngoscope or a conventional Macintosh laryngoscope. All of them underwent an initial direct laryngoscopy, which was scored according to the Cormack and Lehane grading system, under general anesthesia and muscle relaxation. Then intubation was performed by another anaesthesiologist, using the Macintosh video laryngoscope or the conventional Macintosh laryngoscope, who gave a second laryngoscopy score as well. The difference in scores between video and direct laryngoscopy views, in patients undergoing intubation with the video laryngoscope was our primary outcome comparison. Comparison of times to intubate and lower oxygen saturation values between the two groups was also performed. Data were analyzed using McNemar, Pearson, Kendal, chi-square and t-test. Significantly lower scores were recorded for Video laryngoscopy views in 38% of patients, evaluated with both laryngoscopy techniques (p<0,001). However, mean time to intubate with the video laryngoscope was significantly prolonged (p<0,001), as it took an additional 10 sec for intubation..