Comparison of the Miller and Macintosh laryngoscopes in simulated pediatric trauma patient: a pilot study
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Airway management in pediatric trauma patients is challenging. Direct laryngoscopy is the gold standard for endotracheal intubation in emergency and trauma patients. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of Miller (MIL) and Macintosh (MAC) laryngoscopes when employed in emergency pediatric intubation scenarios.
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center study on novice physicians recruited on a voluntary basis. Each participant performer endotracheal intubation using Miller or Macintosh laryngoscopes during two airway scenarios: Scenario A — normal airway; Scenario B — difficult airway, defined as scenario in which the patient was placed on backboard with neck immobilization performer using rigid cervical collar. The order of use of one or other of the devices was randomized with a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint was the first attempt success rate.
RESULTS: The effectiveness of the first intubation attempt in Scenario B for MAC was 36.8%, for MIL — 44.7%; while in Scenario A for MAC this was 36.8%, for MIL — 44.7%. During Scenario A, the median duration time of intubation using MIL was 24.5 s [IQR; 21–32.5] and 23 s [IQR; 20.5–31] for MAC. During Scenario B, median intubation time with the MAC laryngoscope was 40.5 [IQR; 36.5–47] s, and with MIL 37.5 [IQR; 33–44.5] seconds.
CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that in trauma pediatric patients the Miller laryngoscope is associated with higher first attempt success rates than the Macintosh laryngoscope. These data suggest that for patients with cervical spine immobilization, the Miller laryngoscope should be the preferred method of intubation in emergency medicine conditions.
Keywords: endotracheal intubationsimulationpediatrictraumaefficacy
References
- Andersen LW, Raymond TT, Berg RA, et al. American Heart Association’s Get With The Guidelines–Resuscitation Investigators. Association Between Tracheal Intubation During Pediatric In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Survival. JAMA. 2016; 316(17): 1786–1797.
- Hansen M, Meckler G, OʼBrien K, et al. Pediatric Airway Management and Prehospital Patient Safety: Results of a National Delphi Survey by the Children's Safety Initiative-Emergency Medical Services for Children. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2016; 32(9): 603–607.
- Szarpak L, Karczewska K, Evrin T, et al. Comparison of intubation through the McGrath MAC, GlideScope, AirTraq, and Miller Laryngoscope by paramedics during child CPR: a randomized crossover manikin trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2015; 33(7): 946–950.
- Gawlowski P, Smereka J, Madziala M, et al. Comparison of the Macintosh laryngoscope and blind intubation via the iGEL for intubation with cervical spine immobilization: A randomized, crossover, manikin trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2016 [Epub ahead of print].
- Truszewski Z, Szarpak L, Czyzewski L, et al. A comparison of the ETView VivaSight SL against a fiberoptic bronchoscope for nasotracheal intubation of multitrauma patients during resuscitation. A randomized, crossover, manikin study. Am J Emerg Med. 2015; 33(8): 1097–1099.
- Bogdański Ł, Truszewski Z, Kurowski A, et al. Simulated endotracheal intubation of a patient with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation: a randomized comparison of the Pentax AWS, the Airtraq, and the McCoy Laryngoscopes. Am J Emerg Med. 2015; 33(12): 1814–1817.
- Varghese E, Kundu R. Does the Miller blade truly provide a better laryngoscopic view and intubating conditions than the Macintosh blade in small children? Paediatr Anaesth. 2014; 24(8): 825–829.
- Sims C. The Miller and Macintosh blades in young children. Paediatr Anaesth. 2014; 24(11): 1196.
- Kulkarni AP, Tirmanwar AS. Comparison of glottic visualisation and ease of intubation with different laryngoscope blades. Indian J Anaesth. 2013; 57(2): 170–174.
- Truszewski Z, Krajewski P, Fudalej M, et al. A comparison of a traditional endotracheal tube versus ETView SL in endotracheal intubation during different emergency conditions: A randomized, crossover cadaver trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(44): 1–6.
- Truszewski Z, Czyzewski L, Smereka J, et al. Ability of paramedics to perform endotracheal intubation during continuous chest compressions: a randomized cadaver study comparing Pentax AWS and Macintosh laryngoscopes. Am J Emerg Med. 2016; 34(9): 1835–1839.
- Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia. 1984; 39(11): 1105–1111.
- Landry WB, Nossaman BD. Airway risk factors for the Miller laryngoscope blade. J Clin Anesth. 2016; 33: 62–67.
- Passi Y, Sathyamoorthy M, Lerman J, et al. Comparison of the laryngoscopy views with the size 1 Miller and Macintosh laryngoscope blades lifting the epiglottis or the base of the tongue in infants and children <2 yr of age. Br J Anaesth. 2014; 113(5): 869–874.
- Inal MT, Memis D, Kargi M, et al. Comparison of TruView EVO2 with Miller laryngoscope in paediatric patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2010; 27(11): 950–954.
- Singh R, Singh P, Vajifdar H. A comparison of Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller blade in neonates and infants. Paediatr Anaesth. 2009; 19(4): 338–342.
- Goksu E, Kilic T, Yildiz G, et al. Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the Macintosh laryngoscope for intubation of blunt trauma patients in the ED. Turk J Emerg Med. 2016; 16(2): 53–56.
- Yumul R, Elvir-Lazo OL, White PF, et al. Comparison of three video laryngoscopy devices to direct laryngoscopy for intubating obese patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Anesth. 2016; 31: 71–77.
- Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, et al. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 11: CD011136.
- Szarpak L, Truszewski Z, Czyzewski L, et al. A comparison of the McGrath-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes for child tracheal intubation during resuscitation by paramedics. A randomized, crossover, manikin study. Am J Emerg Med. 2016; 34(8): 1338–1341.
- Szarpak Ł, Czyżewski Ł, Kurowski A, et al. Comparison of the TruView PCD video laryngoscope and macintosh laryngoscope for pediatric tracheal intubation by novice paramedics: a randomized crossover simulation trial. Eur J Pediatr. 2015; 174(10): 1325–1332.
- Eisenberg MA, Green-Hopkins I, Werner H, et al. Comparison Between Direct and Video-assisted Laryngoscopy for Intubations in a Pediatric Emergency Department. Acad Emerg Med. 2016; 23(8): 870–877.
- Hippard HK, Kalyani G, Olutoye OA, et al. A comparison of the Truview PCD and the GlideScope Cobalt AVL video-laryngoscopes to the Miller blade for successfully intubating manikins simulating normal and difficult pediatric airways. Paediatr Anaesth. 2016; 26(6): 613–620.