Vol 7, No 1 (2022)
Research paper
Published online: 2022-03-18
Video-assisted versus macintosh direct laryngoscopy for intubation of obese patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
1
, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Disaster Emerg Med J 2022;7(1):30-40.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the usefulness of video-assisted (VL) approaches with the Macintosh direct laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation of obese patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Studies were obtained via a systematic search of SCOPUS, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central databases. The polled relative risks (RRs) odds ratios (ODs) or standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with a random–effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the influence of VL types on the association.
RESULTS: First intubation attempt success rate in VL and DL group varied and amounted to 94.7% vs 89.5% respectively (OR = 2.04; 95% CI: 1.21–3.42; p = 0.007) and overall intubation success rate was 99.0% vs 97.5% respectively (OR = 2.20; 95% CI: 0.45–10.67; p = 0.33). Intubation time which was 48.0 ± 37.7 for VL and 48.4 ± 37.5 seconds for DL (SMD = 0.14; 95% CI: –0.33–0.61; p = 0.56). Cormack-Lehane 1 or 2 grade during intubation using VL was observed in 95.9% of cases and was statistically significantly higher than in the case of direct laryngoscopy (79.6%; OR = 6.68; 95% CI: 3.32–13.42; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that video-assisted intubation may be superior to conventional intubation in an obese patient population due to a higher first–attempt success rate, better glottis visibility, and a lower rate of intubation-related injuries.
Keywords: video-laryngoscopedirect-laryngoscopeendotracheal intubationobeseintubation attemptintubation timemeta-analysis
References
- Wang T, Sun S, Huang S. The association of body mass index with difficult tracheal intubation management by direct laryngoscopy: a meta-analysis. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018; 18(1): 79.
- Hruby A, Hu FB. The Epidemiology of Obesity: A Big Picture. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015; 33(7): 673–689.
- Szarpak L, Drozd A, Smereka J. Airway management and ventilation principles in COVID-19 patients. J Clin Anesth. 2020; 65: 109877.
- Ludwin K, Bialka S, Czyzewski L, et al. Video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation of adult patients with suspected/ confirmed COVID-19. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal. 2020.
- Maslanka M, Smereka J, Pruc M, et al. Airtraq® versus Macintosh laryngoscope for airway management during general anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal. 2021.
- Güngörer B, Findik M, Kayipmaz A. USB-endoscope laryngoscope is as effective as video laryngoscope in difficult intubation. Disaster and Emergency Medicine Journal. 2021; 6(2): 75–79.
- Niforopoulou P, Pantazopoulos I, Demestiha T, et al. Video-laryngoscopes in the adult airway management: a topical review of the literature. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010; 54(9): 1050–1061.
- Huitink JM, Koopman EM, Bouwman RA, et al. Tracheal intubation with a camera embedded in the tube tip (Vivasight(™)). Anaesthesia. 2013; 68(1): 74–78.
- Liu EHC, Goy RWL, Chen FG. The LMA CTrach, a new laryngeal mask airway for endotracheal intubation under vision: evaluation in 100 patients. Br J Anaesth. 2006; 96(3): 396–400.
- Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 134(3): 103–112.
- Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019; 366: l4898.
- McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): An R package and shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods. 2021; 12(1): 55–61.
- Atkins D, Briss PA, Eccles M, et al. GRADE Working Group. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations II: pilot study of a new system. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005; 5(1): 25.
- Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005; 5: 13.
- Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane, 2021. www.training.cochrane.org/handbook (20.09.2021).
- Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003; 327(7414): 557–560.
- Abdallah R, Galway U, You J, et al. A randomized comparison between the Pentax AWS video laryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope in morbidly obese patients. Anesth Analg. 2011; 113(5): 1082–1087.
- Ander F, Magnuson A, Berggren L, et al. Time-to-intubation in obese patients. A randomized study comparing direct laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy in experienced anesthetists. Minerva Anestesiol. 2017; 83(9): 906–913.
- Andersen LH, Rovsing L, Olsen KS. GlideScope videolaryngoscope vs. Macintosh direct laryngoscope for intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011; 55(9): 1090–1097.
- Barak M, Assalia A, Mahajna A, et al. The use of VivaSight™ single lumen endotracheal tube in morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. BMC Anesthesiol. 2014; 14: 31.
- Bathory I, Granges JC, Frascarolo P, et al. Evaluation of the Video Intubation Unit in morbid obese patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010; 54(1): 55–58.
- Çakir M, Özyurt E. Comparison of direct laryngoscope and McGrath videolaryngoscope in terms of glottic view and hemodynamics in bariatric surgery. Turk J Med Sci. 2020; 50(1): 213–218.
- Castillo-Monzón CG, Marroquín-Valz HA, Fernández-Villacañas-Marín M, et al. Comparison of the macintosh and airtraq laryngoscopes in morbidly obese patients: a randomized and prospective study. J Clin Anesth. 2017; 36: 136–141.
- Dhonneur G, Abdi W, Ndoko SK, et al. Video-assisted versus conventional tracheal intubation in morbidly obese patients. Obes Surg. 2009; 19(8): 1096–1101.
- Marrel J, Blanc C, Frascarolo P, et al. Videolaryngoscopy improves intubation condition in morbidly obese patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2007; 24(12): 1045–1049.
- Nandakumar KP, Bhalla AP, Pandey RK, et al. Comparison of Macintosh, McCoy, and Glidescope video laryngoscope for intubation in morbidly obese patients: Randomized controlled trial. Saudi J Anaesth. 2018; 12(3): 433–439.
- Ndoko SK, Amathieu R, Tual L, et al. Tracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial comparing performance of Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopes. Br J Anaesth. 2008; 100(2): 263–268.
- Wallace CD, Foulds LT, McLeod GA, et al. A comparison of the ease of tracheal intubation using a McGrath MAC(®)laryngoscope and a standard Macintosh laryngoscope. Anaesthesia. 2015; 70(11): 1281–1285.
- Ranieri D, Filho SM, Batista S, et al. Comparison of Macintosh and Airtraq™ laryngoscopes in obese patients placed in the ramped position. Anaesthesia. 2012; 67(9): 980–985.
- Ruetzler K, Rivas E, Cohen B, et al. McGrath video laryngoscope versus Macintosh direct laryngoscopy for intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial. Anesth Analg. 2020; 131(2): 586–593.
- Yousef GT, Abdalgalil DA, Ibrahim TH. Orotracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients, comparison of GlideScope(®) video laryngoscope and the LMA CTrach™ with direct laryngoscopy. Anesth Essays Res. 2012; 6(2): 174–179.
- 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.
- Hoshijima H, Denawa Y, Tominaga A, et al. Videolaryngoscope versus Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adults with obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 2018; 44: 69–75.
- Brettig S, Shurgott M, Quinn SJ, et al. Validation of a difficult endotracheal intubation simulator designed for use in anaesthesia training. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2017; 45(2): 228–234.
- Pieters B, Maassen R, Van Eig E, et al. Indirect videolaryngoscopy using Macintosh blades in patients with non-anticipated difficult airways results in significantly lower forces exerted on teeth relative to classic direct laryngoscopy: a randomized crossover trial. Minerva Anestesiol. 2015; 81(8): 846–854.
- Aleksandrowicz D, Gaszyński T. The pressure exerted on the tongue during intubation with simultaneous cervical spine immobilisation: a comparison between four videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope—a manikin study. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing. 2017; 32(5): 907–913.
- Carassiti M, Biselli V, Cecchini S, et al. Force and pressure distribution using Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscopes in normal airway: an in vivo study. Minerva Anestesiol. 2013; 79(5): 515–524.