Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023
Comparison of C-MAC Miller blade video laryngoscope with conventional Miller blade in infants undergoing elective surgery- A prospective randomised trial.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Manhas Samriti, Agrawal Nidhi, Jain Swati, Sharma Ridhima, Choudhary Ripon
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endotracheal intubation (ET) in infants is considered a challenging task over the decades. Infants have short safe apnoea time, and this difficulty has been vanquished to some extent by using the videolaryngoscopes (VLs), but there exists a dearth of research particularly in this vulnerable subset. Therefore, this trial was conducted to evaluate intubation times obtained with C-MAC VL and conventional Miller laryngoscopes in infants.
METHODS: A total of 80 infants aged between 1 month and 1 year with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II requiring ET were randomised in two groups; the C-MAC VL or Miller laryngoscope ML. Anaesthesia was induced with sevoflurane 1-8% and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV. The primary outcome was evaluated as the total time taken to intubate. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve best glottic view (TBGV), tube insertion time (TIT), percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, number of attempts and intubation difficulty score (IDS).
RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) of time taken for ET was less in VL; 22.5 (20.75-26) compared to ML; 26 (21.75-31). TBGV was achieved early in VL group than the ML group (6.03 ± 1.33s/7.88 ± 2.44) respectively (P-value < 0.001). POGO was better in VL (99.12 ± 4.795s) compared to ML (85.50 ± 31.13s). IDS was less in the VL group (0.07 ± 0.27) than in ML (0.70 ± 1.14). Other parameters, such as the number of attempts, bougie usage, adverse effects and TIT, were comparable across the two groups.
CONCLUSION: When compared to the ML group, the C-MAC VL group exhibited a decreased intubation time, early TBGV, better POGO score, reduced IDS and subjective intubation difficulty. As a result, we consider VL to be a more efficacious device for intubating the trachea in infants.
METHODS: A total of 80 infants aged between 1 month and 1 year with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II requiring ET were randomised in two groups; the C-MAC VL or Miller laryngoscope ML. Anaesthesia was induced with sevoflurane 1-8% and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV. The primary outcome was evaluated as the total time taken to intubate. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve best glottic view (TBGV), tube insertion time (TIT), percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, number of attempts and intubation difficulty score (IDS).
RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) of time taken for ET was less in VL; 22.5 (20.75-26) compared to ML; 26 (21.75-31). TBGV was achieved early in VL group than the ML group (6.03 ± 1.33s/7.88 ± 2.44) respectively (P-value < 0.001). POGO was better in VL (99.12 ± 4.795s) compared to ML (85.50 ± 31.13s). IDS was less in the VL group (0.07 ± 0.27) than in ML (0.70 ± 1.14). Other parameters, such as the number of attempts, bougie usage, adverse effects and TIT, were comparable across the two groups.
CONCLUSION: When compared to the ML group, the C-MAC VL group exhibited a decreased intubation time, early TBGV, better POGO score, reduced IDS and subjective intubation difficulty. As a result, we consider VL to be a more efficacious device for intubating the trachea in infants.