Comparison of the C-MAC(®) and GlideScope(®) videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine disorders and immobilisation.

ANAESTHESIA(2015)

引用 26|浏览1
暂无评分
摘要
In-line stabilisation of the neck can increase the difficulty of tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy. We randomly assigned 56 patients with cervical spine pathology scheduled for elective surgery to tracheal intubation using either the C-MAC((R)) (n=26) or GlideScope((R)) (n=30), when the head and neck were stabilised in-line. There was no significant difference in the median (IQR [range]) intubation times between the C-MAC (19 (14-35 [9-90]) s and the GlideScope (23, (15-32 [8-65]) s. The first-attempt failure rate for the C-MAC was 42% (95% CI 23-63%) compared with 7% (95% CI 1-22%) for the GlideScope, p=0.002. The laryngeal view was excellent and comparable with both devices, with the C-MAC requiring significantly more attempts and optimising manoeuvers (11 vs 5, respectively, p=0.04). There were no significant differences in postoperative complaints e.g. sore throat, hoarseness and dysphagia. Both devices provided an excellent glottic view in patients with cervical spine immobilisation, but tracheal intubation was more often successful on the first attempt with the GlideScope.
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要