scholarly journals Randomized trial comparing the i-gel™ and Magill tracheal tube with the single-use ILMA™ and ILMA™ tracheal tube for fibreoptic-guided intubation in anaesthetized patients with a predicted difficult airway

2011 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Kleine-Brueggeney ◽  
L. Theiler ◽  
N. Urwyler ◽  
A. Vogt ◽  
R. Greif
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Difficult Airway ◽  
Tracheal Tube ◽  
Single Use

scholarly journals Tracheal Tube-Mounted Camera Assisted Intubation vs. Videolaryngoscopy in Expected Difficult Airway: A Prospective, Randomized Trial (VivaOP Trial)

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jörn Grensemann ◽  
Emma Möhlenkamp ◽  
Philipp Breitfeld ◽  
Pischtaz A. Tariparast ◽  
Tanja Peters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tracheal Intubation ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Difficult Airway ◽  
Tracheal Tube ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Prospective Randomized Trial ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Blade Shape ◽  
Difficult Airways ◽  
End Tidal

Background: Tracheal intubation in patients with an expected difficult airway may be facilitated by videolaryngoscopy (VL). The VL viewing axis angle is specified by the blade shape and visualization of the larynx may fail if the angle does not meet anatomy of the patient. A tube with an integrated camera at its tip (VST, VivaSight-SL) may be advantageous due to its adjustable viewing axis by means of angulating an included stylet.Methods: With ethics approval, we studied the VST vs. VL in a prospective non-inferiority trial using end-tidal oxygen fractions (etO2) after intubation, first-attempt success rates (FAS), visualization assessed by the percentage of glottis opening (POGO) scale, and time to intubation (TTI) as outcome parameters.Results: In this study, 48 patients with a predicted difficult airway were randomized 1:1 to intubation with VST or VL. Concerning oxygenation, the VST was non-inferior to VL with etO2 of 0.79 ± 0.08 (95% CIs: 0.75–0.82) vs. 0.81 ± 0.06 (0.79–0.84) for the VL group, mean difference 0.02 (−0.07 to 0.02), p = 0.234. FAS was 79% for VST and 88% for VL (p = 0.449). POGO was 89 ± 21% in the VST-group and 60 ± 36% in the VL group, p = 0.002. TTI was 100 ± 57 s in the VST group and 68 ± 65 s in the VL group (p = 0.079). TTI with one attempt was 84 ± 31 s vs. 49 ± 14 s, p < 0.001.Conclusion: In patients with difficult airways, tracheal intubation with the VST is feasible without negative impact on oxygenation, improves visualization but prolongs intubation. The VST deserves further study to identify patients that might benefit from intubation with VST.

scholarly journals Videolaryngoscope‐assisted flexible intubation tracheal tube exchange in a patient with a difficult airway

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. G. Saunders ◽  
M. L. Gibbins ◽  
C. A. Seller ◽  
F. E. Kelly ◽  
T. M. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Difficult Airway ◽  
Tracheal Tube ◽  
Tube Exchange

scholarly journals The AirView Study: Comparison of Intubation Conditions and Ease between the Airtraq-AirView and the King Vision

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Schoettker ◽  
Jocelyn Corniche
Keyword(s):  
Difficult Airway ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Tracheal Tube ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Lung Ventilation ◽  
Professional Experience ◽  
Tube Insertion ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

We conducted a study assessing the quality and speed of intubation between the Airtraq with its new iPhone AirView app and the King Vision in a manikin. The primary endpoint was reduction of time needed for intubation. Secondary endpoints included times necessary for intubation. 30 anaesthetists randomly performed 3 intubations with each device on a difficult airway manikin. Participants had a professional experience of 12 years: 60.0% possessed the Airtraq in their hospital, 46.7% the King Vision, and 20.0% both. Median time difference [IQR] to identify glottis (1.1 [−1.3; 3.9]P=0.019), for tube insertion (2.1 [−2.6; 9.4]P=0.002) and lung ventilation (2.8 [−2.4; 11.5]P=0.001), was shorter with the Airtraq-AirView. Median time for glottis visualization was significantly shorter with the Airtraq-AirView (5.3 [4.0; 8.4] versus 6.4 [4.6; 9.1]). Cormack Lehane before intubation was better with the King Vision (P=0.03); no difference was noted during intubation, for subjective device insertion or quality of epiglottis visualisation. Assessment of tracheal tube insertion was better with the Airtraq-AirView. The Airtraq-AirView allows faster identification of the landmarks and intubation in a difficult airway manikin, while clinical relevance remains to be studied. Anaesthetists assessed the intubation better with the Airtraq-AirView.

Evaluation of clinical effectiveness of the Frova single-use tracheal tube introducer

Anaesthesia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Hodzovic ◽  
A. R. Wilkes ◽  
M. Stacey ◽  
I. P. Latto
Keyword(s):  
Tracheal Tube ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Single Use
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document