Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Anesth. 2012 Nov;24(7):593-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2012.04.005.

Videolaryngoscopy: should it replace direct laryngoscopy? a pro-con debate.

Author information

1
Department of Anesthesiology, St. Agnes Hospital, Baltimore, MD 21229, USA. krothfiel@stagnes.org

Abstract

Although it is universally recognized that the advent of videolaryngoscopy has revolutionized airway management, there is considerable disagreement over the future role of direct laryngoscopy and whether direct laryngoscopy should be relegated to a legacy technique. Arguments against the continued relevance of traditional intubation methods include increased success and decreased complications when videolaryngoscopy is utilized, as well as the fact that videolaryngoscopy enhances the performance of nonanesthesia providers. However, proponents of direct laryngoscopy cite technical issues, as well as instances in which intubation by videolaryngoscopy fails despite successful visualization. This argument serves as the rationale for the continued use of direct laryngoscopy, particularly for airway management experts.

PMID:
23101777
DOI:
10.1016/j.jclinane.2012.04.005
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center