Comparison of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation in hypertensive patients: laryngoscopy via Macintosh blade versus GlideScope video laryngoscope

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 235
Author(s):  
A. Peirovifar ◽  
M. Mostafa Gharehbaghi ◽  
R. Azarfarin ◽  
L. Karimi
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
LEYLA KILINÇ ◽  
HACER SEBNEM TURK ◽  
SURHAN CINAR ◽  
CANAN TÜLAY ISIL ◽  
MELTEM KABA

Abstract Background: We compared intubation conditions, intubation times, and hemodynamic response with the GlideScope video laryngoscope or the Macintosh direct laryngoscope in children older than one year. Methods: In total, 80 patients aged 1–12 years, scheduled to undergo elective surgery under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation were included in a prospective, randomized trial.After standard anesthesia induction, patients were randomized into two groups.The group G patients(n = 40) were intubated with the GlideScope and the group M patients(n = 40) were intubated with the Macintosh laryngoscope.Intubation time, number of attempts,Cormack–Lehane score, airway maneuvers,visual analog score were recorded. Hemodynamic variables were recorded before and after anesthesia induction, at intubation, and one,three, and five minutes after intubation. Results: The demographic data and operation time were similar between the two groups. The intubation time was longer in Group G. The incidence of Cormack–Lehane score 1 was higher in Group G and that of Cormack–Lehane score 2 was higher in Group M. The hemodynamic parameters were similar between the two groups. Conclusion: We concluded that the GlideScope video laryngoscope provided better glottis visualization, but prolonged intubation time. No beneficial hemodynamic effect was found with the video laryngoscope. Keywords: Macintosh Laryngoscope, Orotracheal Intubation, Videolaringoscope, Pediatric Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03326882, retrospectively registered, October 31, 2017


2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 352-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirsad Dupanović ◽  
Sheldon A. Isaacson ◽  
Žana Borovčanin ◽  
Sushma Jain ◽  
Santiago Korten ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 732-736
Author(s):  
Shalini Bajpai

BACKGROUND Video laryngoscope is an important tool for orotracheal intubation in anaesthesia practice particularly in difficult airways. It provides an indirect view of glottis without the need of alignment of oropharyngeal-laryngeal axis. We compared the intubation characteristics of channelled versus non-channelled blades of King VisionTM Video Laryngoscope. METHODS In this study 60 patients were randomly allocated to two groups; group C were intubated with channelled and group NC with non-channelled blade of King Vision. We measured time for glottis visualisation and intubation time using both blades. Percentage of glottis opening (POGO), insertion attempts, intubation attempts, and ease of intubation were also assessed. RESULTS The time for glottis visualisation was 8.5 ± 3 seconds for group C and 7 ± 2 seconds for group NC. Intubation time was 24 ± 8.5 seconds for group C and 44 ± 5 seconds for NC. There was no statistical difference in POGO, insertion attempts, intubation attempts and ease of intubation between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS We concluded that the time for glottis recognition is longer but intubation time is shorter when using King Vision video laryngoscope channelled blade as compared to non-channelled blade. KEYWORDS Video Laryngoscope, King Vision, Channelled, Non-Channelled


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document