The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in neonates.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Lingappan Krithika, Arnold Jennifer L, Shaw Thomas L, Fernandes Caraciolo J, Pammi Mohan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Establishment of secure airway is a critical part of neonatal resuscitation both in the delivery room and in the neonatal unit. Videolaryngoscopy is a new technique that has the potential to facilitate successful endotracheal intubation and decrease adverse consequences of delay in airway stabilization. Videolaryngoscopy may enhance visualization of the glottis and intubation success in neonates.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy compared to direct laryngoscopy in decreasing the time and attempts required and increasing the success rate for endotracheal intubation in neonates.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. We searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating videolaryngoscopy for neonatal endotracheal intubation in May 2013 in the electronic databases; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; abstracts of the Pediatric Academic Societies; websites for registered trials at www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlled-trials.com; and in the reference lists of relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized trials in neonates evaluating videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors performed data collection and analysis as recommended by the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. Two review authors (KL and MP) independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion.
MAIN RESULTS: Our search strategy performed in May 2013 yielded 7057 references. Two review authors (MP and KL) independently assessed all references for inclusion. We did not find any completed studies for inclusion but identified three ongoing trials and one study awaiting classification.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to recommend or refute the use of videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in neonates. Well-designed, adequately powered randomized controlled studies are necessary to address efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in neonates.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy compared to direct laryngoscopy in decreasing the time and attempts required and increasing the success rate for endotracheal intubation in neonates.
SEARCH METHODS: We used the search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. We searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating videolaryngoscopy for neonatal endotracheal intubation in May 2013 in the electronic databases; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; abstracts of the Pediatric Academic Societies; websites for registered trials at www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlled-trials.com; and in the reference lists of relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized trials in neonates evaluating videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors performed data collection and analysis as recommended by the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. Two review authors (KL and MP) independently assessed studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion.
MAIN RESULTS: Our search strategy performed in May 2013 yielded 7057 references. Two review authors (MP and KL) independently assessed all references for inclusion. We did not find any completed studies for inclusion but identified three ongoing trials and one study awaiting classification.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence to recommend or refute the use of videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in neonates. Well-designed, adequately powered randomized controlled studies are necessary to address efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in neonates.