Comparison of the intubation success rate between the intubating catheter and videolaryngoscope in difficult airways: a prospective randomized trial
Aysun Ozdemirkan, Ozkan Onal, Irem Gumus Ozcan, Emine Aslanlar, Ali Saltali, Mehmet Sari, Cansu Ciftci, Hasan Huseyin Bayram
Several devices and algorithms have already been examined and compared for difficult airway management. However, there is no existing study comparing the success of the Intubating Catheter (IC) and the Videolaryngoscope (VL) in patients who are difficult to intubate. We aimed to compare Frova IC and McGrath VL in terms of intubation success rates in patients with difficult intubation.
This prospective, randomized study was performed in an university hospital. Patients who underwent an operation under general anesthesia and whom airway management process was deemed difficult were included in this study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups by envelopes containing a number: the intubating catheter group (Group IC), intubated using the Frova IC, and the videolaryngoscope group (Group VL), intubated using the McGrath VL. Study data were collected by a technician who was blind to the study groups and the type of device used in the intubation procedure.
A total of 49 patients with difficult airway were included in the study, including 25 patients in the Frova IC Group and 24 patients in the McGrath VL Group. The rate of successful intubation was determined to be 88% in Group IC and 66% in Group VL (p = 0.074). The mean duration of intubation attempt in Group VL was 44.62 seconds, whereas in Group IC, it was 51.12 seconds (p = 0.593). Group VL was found to have a significantly lower Cormack-Lehane grade compared to Group IC (p < 0.001).
Frova IC is a candidate to be an indispensable instrument in terms of cost-effectiveness in clinics such as anesthesia and emergency medicine, where difficult intubation cases are frequently encountered. However, the combination of Frova IC and McGrath VL seems to be more successful in difficult intubation situations, so future studies should focus on using these two devices together.
1 T. Asai Videolaryngoscopes: do they truly have roles in difficult airways? Anesthesiology, 116 (2012), pp. 515-517
2 C. Zaouter, J. Calderon, T.M. Hemmerling Videolaryngoscopy as a new standard of care Br J Anaesth, 114 (2015), pp. 181-183
3 R.S. Cormack, J. Lehane Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics Anaesthesia, 39 (1984), pp. 1105-1111
4 A.M. Taylor, M. Peck, S. Launcelott, et al. The McGrath Series 5 videolaryngoscope vs the Macintosh laryngoscope: a randomised, controlled trial in patients with a simulated difficult airway Anaesthesia, 68 (2013), pp. 142-147
5 B. Shippey, D. Ray, D. McKeown Use of the McGrath videolaryngoscope in the management of difficult and failed tracheal intubation Br J Anaesth, 100 (2008), pp. 116-119
6 T. Asai, K. Murao, K. Shingu Training method of applying pressure on the neck for laryngoscopy: use of a videolaryngoscope Anaesthesia, 58 (2003), pp. 602-603
7 J. Lee, J.Y. Kim, S.Y. Kang, et al. Stylet angulation for routine endotracheal intubation with McGrath videolaryngoscope Medicine (Baltimore), 96 (2017), p. 6152
8 R.R. Noppens, S. Möbus, F. Heid, et al. Evaluation of the McGrath Series 5 videolaryngoscope after failed direct laryngoscopy Anaesthesia, 65 (2010), pp. 716-720
9 M.J. Messa, D.F. Kupas, D.L. Dunham Comparison of bougie-assisted intubation with traditional endotracheal intubation in a simulated difficult airway Prehosp Emerg Care, 15 (2011), pp. 30-33
10 I. Hodzovic, I.P. Latto, A.R. Wilkes, et al. Evaluation of Frova, single-use intubation introducer, in a manikin. Comparison with Eschmann multiple-use introducer and Portex single-use introducer Anaesthesia, 59 (2004), pp. 811-816
11 I. Hodzovic, A.R. Wilkes, M. Stacey, et al. Evaluation of clinical effectiveness of the Frova single-use tracheal tube introducer Anaesthesia, 63 (2008), pp. 189-194
12 I. Ng, A.L. Hill, D.L. Williams, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing the McGrath videolaryngoscope with the C-MAC videolaryngoscope in intubating adult patients with potential difficult airways Br J Anaesth, 109 (2012), pp. 439-443
13 W.A. Wetsch, O. Spelten, M. Hellmich, et al. Comparison of different video laryngoscopes for emergency intubation in a standardized airway manikin with immobilized cervical spine by experienced anaesthetists. A randomized, controlled crossover trial Resuscitation, 83 (2012), pp. 740-745
14 L. Theiler, K. Hermann, P. Schoettker, et al. SWIVIT - Swiss video-intubation trial evaluating video-laryngoscopes in a simulated difficult airway scenario: study protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial in Switzerland Trials, 14 (2013), p. 94
15 O. Onal, I. Gumus, A. Ozdemirkan, et al. A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne, 14 (2019), pp. 486-494
16 Mf Aziz, Ro Abrons, D. Cattano, et al. First-attempt intubation success of video laryngoscopy in patients with anticipated difficult direct laryngoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the C-MAC D-bladeversus the glidescope in a mixed provider and diverse patient population Anesth Analg, 122 (2016), pp. 740-750
17 J.L. Apfelbaum, C.A. Hagberg, R.A. Caplan, et al. A. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway Anesthesiology, 118 (2013), pp. 251-270
18 G. Frova Do videolaryngoscopes have a new role in the SIAARTI difficult airway management algorithm? Minerva Anestesiol, 76 (2010), pp. 637-640
19 D.W. Healy, O. Maties, D. Hovord, et al. A systematic review of the role of videolaryngoscopy in successful orotracheal intubation BMC Anesthesiol, 14 (2012), p. 32
20 P. Gregory, M. Woollard, D. Lighton, et al. Comparison of malleable stylet and reusable and disposable bougies by paramedics in a simulated difficult intubation Anaesthesia, 67 (2012), pp. 371-376
21 C. Frerk, V.S. Mitchell, A.F. McNarry, et al. Difficult Airway Society intubation guidelines working group. Difficult Airway Society 2015 Guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults Br J Anaesth, 115 (2015), pp. 827-848
22 C. Janakiraman, I. Hodzovic, S. Reddy, et al. Evaluation of tracheal tube introducers in simulated difficult intubation Anaesthesia, 64 (2009), pp. 309-314
23 M.Á Gómez-Ríos, S. Pinegger, M. de Carrillo Mantilla, et al. A randomised crossover trial comparing the Airtraq® NT, McGrath® MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes for nasotracheal intubation of simulated easy and difficult airways in a manikin Rev Bras Anestesiol, 66 (2016), pp. 289-297
24 C.D. Wallace, L.T. Foulds, G.A. McLeod, et al. A comparison of the ease of tracheal intubation using a McGrath MAC laryngoscope and a standard Macintosh laryngoscope Anaesthesia, 70 (2015), pp. 1281-1285
25 L. Suppan, M.R. Tramèr, M. Niquille, et al. Alternative intubation techniques vs Macintosh laryngoscopy in patients with cervical spine immobilization: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Br J Anaesth, 116 (2016), pp. 27-36