Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2011 Nov;28(11):788-95. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32834a34f3.

Comparison of video laryngoscopes with direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Author information

1
Emergency Department, Buddhist Tzu Chi Dalin General Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Video laryngoscopes have been introduced in recent years as an alternative choice to facilitate tracheal intubation. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess their value when compared with direct laryngoscopy.

METHODS:

PubMed and EMBASE were searched up until 24 September 2010. Randomised trials that reported data on the comparison of video laryngoscopes with direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation were included.

RESULTS:

Eleven trials with a total of 1196 participants were identified. During tracheal intubation, video laryngoscopes can achieve a better view of the glottis and have a similar success rate [rate ratio 1.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.01]. Overall, the time to tracheal intubation was not different between the video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopy (standardised mean difference 0.19; 95% CI -0.37-0.75). However, in a subgroup analysis, video laryngoscopes shortened the time taken for difficult intubation (standardised mean difference, -0.75; 95% CI -1.24 to -0.25).

CONCLUSION:

Video laryngoscopes are a good alternative to direct laryngoscopy during tracheal intubation. The advantage seems to be more prominent when difficult intubation is encountered.

PMID:
21897263
DOI:
10.1097/EJA.0b013e32834a34f3
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center