Early clinical experience with a new videolaryngoscope (GlideScope®) in 728 patients

Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia - Tập 52 - Trang 191-198 - 2005
Richard M. Cooper1,2, John A. Pacey3, Michael J. Bishop4, Stuart A. McCluskey1
1From the Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada
2University of Toronto, Toronto
3University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
4the Departments of Anesthesiology and Medicine, University of Washington and Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, USA

Tóm tắt

To evaluate a new videolaryngoscope and assess its ability to provide laryngeal exposure and facilitate intubation. Five centres, involving 133 operators and a total of 728 consecutive patients, participated in the evaluation of a new videolaryngoscope [GlideScope® (GS)]. Many operators had limited or no previous GS experience. We collected information about patient demographics and airway characteristics, Cormack-Lehane (C/L) views and the ease of intubation using the GS. Failure was defined as abandonment of the technique. Data from six patients were incomplete and were excluded. Excellent (C/L 1) or good (C/L 2) laryngeal exposure was obtained in 92% and 7% of patients respectively. In all 133 patients in whom both GS and direct laryngoscopy (DL) were performed, GS resulted in a comparable or superior view. Among the 35 patients with C/L grade 3 or 4 views by DL, the view improved to a C/L 1 view in 24 and a C/L 2 view in three patients. Intubation with the GS was successful in 96.3% of patients. The majority of the failures occurred despite a good or excellent glottic view. GS laryngoscopy consistently yielded a comparable or superior glottic view compared with DL despite the limited or lack of prior experience with the device. Successful intubation was generally achieved even when DL was predicted to be moderately or considerably difficult. GS was abandoned in 3.7% of patients. This may reflect the lack of a formal protocol defining failure, limited prior experience or difficulty manipulating the endotracheal tube while viewing a monitor.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Crosby ET, Cooper RM, Douglas MJ, et al. The unanticipated difficult airway with recommendations for management. Can J Anaesth 1998; 45: 757–76. Rose DK, Cohen MM. The airway: problems and predictions in 18,500 patients. Can J Anaesth 1994; 41: 372–83. Domino KB, Posner KL, Caplan RA, Cheney FW. Airway injury during anesthesia. A closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 1703–11. Cooper SD, Benumof JL, Ozaki GT. Evaluation of the Bullard laryngoscope using the new intubating stylet: comparison with conventional laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 965–70. Rosenblatt WH, Wagner PJ, Ovassapian A, Kain ZN. Practice patterns in managing the difficult airway by anesthesiologists in the United States. Anesth Analg 1998; 87: 153–7. Jenkins K, Wong DT, Correa R. Management choices for the difficult airway by anesthesiologists in Canada. Can J Anesth 2002; 49: 850–6. Samsoon GL, Young JR. Difficult tracheal intubation: a retrospective study. Anaesthesia 1987; 42: 487–90. Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 1105–11. Adnet F, Borron SW, Dumas JL, Lapostolle F, Cupa M, Lapandry C. Study of the “sniffing position” by magnetic resonance imaging. Anesthesiology 2001; 94: 83–6. Konrad C, Schupfer G, Wietlisbach M, Gerber H. Learning manual skills in anesthesiology: is there a recommended number of cases for anesthetic procedures? Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 635–9. Mulcaster JT, Mills J, Hung OR, et al. Laryngoscopic intubation. Learning and performance. Anesthesiology 2003; 98: 23–7. Combes X, Le Roux B, Suen P, et al. Unanticipated difficult airway in anesthetized patients. Prospective validation of a management algorithm. Anesthesiology 2004; 100: 1146–50. Adnet F, Racine SX, Borron SW, et al. A survey of tracheal intubation difficulty in the operating room: a prospective observational study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001; 45: 327–32. Karkouti K, Rose DK, Ferris LE, Wigglesworth DF, Meisami-Fard T, Lee H. Inter-observer reliability of ten tests used for predicting difficult tracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth 1996; 43: 554–9. El-Ganzouri AR, McCarthy RJ, Tuman KJ, Tanck EN, Ivankovich AD. Preoperative airway assessment: predictive value of a multivariate risk index. Anesth Analg 1996; 82: 1197–204. Mallampati SR, Gatt SP, Gugino LD, et al. A clinical sign to predict difficult tracheal intubation: a prospective study. Can Anaesth Soc J 1985; 32: 429–34. Cooper RM. Use of a new videolaryngoscope (GlideScope®) in the management of a difficult airway. Can J Anesth 2003; 50: 611–3. Agro F, Barzoi G, Montecchia F. Tracheal intubation using a Macintosh laryngoscope or a GlideScope® in 15 patients with cervical spine immobilization (Letter). Br J Anaesth 2003; 90: 705–6. Levitan RM. A new tool for teaching and supervising direct laryngoscopy. Acad Emerg Med 1996; 3: 79–81. Shulman GB, Nordin NG, Connelly NR. Teaching with a video system improves the training period but not subsequent success of tracheal intubation with the Bullard laryngoscope. Anesthesiology 2003; 98: 615–20. Weiss M, Schwarz U, Dillier CM, Gerber AC. Teaching and supervising tracheal intubation in paediatric patients using videolaryngoscopy. Paediatr Anaesth 2001; 11: 343–8. Kaplan MB, Ward DS, Berci G. A new videolaryngoscope-an aid in intubation and teaching. J Clin Anesth 2003; 14: 620–6. Doyle DJ, Zura A, Ramachandran M. Videolaryngoscopy in the management of the difficult airway (Letter). Can J Anesth 2004; 51: 95.