Journal of anesthesia · 2023
Efficacy of McGRATH®MAC videolaryngoscope blade 1 for tracheal intubation in small children: a randomized controlled clinical study.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Masui Katsuhide, Asai Takashi, Saito Tomoyuki, Okuda Yasuhisa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Videolaryngoscopes may not be as effective in small children as they are in older children and in adults. The size 1 blade is commercially available for the McGRATH®MAC videolaryngoscope (Covidien, Medtronic, Tokyo, Japan), but its efficacy in comparison with a Macintosh laryngoscope blade 1 is not known.
AIM: The main aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of McGrath®MAC blade 1 in comparison with a conventional Macintosh laryngoscope blade 1, in children aged less than 24 months.
METHODS: Thirty-eight children aged less than 24 months were randomly allocated to one of two groups, and tracheal intubation was attempted using either a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh blade 1 or a videolaryngoscope with a McGRATH®MAC blade 1. In another 12 children aged 2-4 years, the same comparisons were made with blade 2. The primary outcome measure was time to tracheal intubation using a size 1 blade.
RESULTS: Tracheal intubation took significantly longer with a McGRATH®MAC blade 1 (median (interquartile range): 38.0 (31.8-43.5) s) than with the Macintosh blade 1(27.4 (25.9-29.2) s) (p < 0.0001; median difference (95% CI for the median difference): 10.6 (6.4-14.0) s), mainly due to difficulty in advancing a tube into the trachea. No significant difference was observed for the size 2.
CONCLUSIONS: In small children without predicted difficult airways, time to intubate the trachea was significantly longer for a McGRATH®MAC blade 1 than a Macintosh blade 1.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: jRCT1032220366.
AIM: The main aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of McGrath®MAC blade 1 in comparison with a conventional Macintosh laryngoscope blade 1, in children aged less than 24 months.
METHODS: Thirty-eight children aged less than 24 months were randomly allocated to one of two groups, and tracheal intubation was attempted using either a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh blade 1 or a videolaryngoscope with a McGRATH®MAC blade 1. In another 12 children aged 2-4 years, the same comparisons were made with blade 2. The primary outcome measure was time to tracheal intubation using a size 1 blade.
RESULTS: Tracheal intubation took significantly longer with a McGRATH®MAC blade 1 (median (interquartile range): 38.0 (31.8-43.5) s) than with the Macintosh blade 1(27.4 (25.9-29.2) s) (p < 0.0001; median difference (95% CI for the median difference): 10.6 (6.4-14.0) s), mainly due to difficulty in advancing a tube into the trachea. No significant difference was observed for the size 2.
CONCLUSIONS: In small children without predicted difficult airways, time to intubate the trachea was significantly longer for a McGRATH®MAC blade 1 than a Macintosh blade 1.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: jRCT1032220366.