Clinical comparison of two stylet angles for orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope video laryngoscope☆☆☆
Abstract
Study Objective
To compare the success of orotracheal intubation in 62 seconds or less using the GlideScope video laryngoscope (GVL) and a 60° or 90° angled stylet with reverse loading of the endotracheal tube (ETT).
Design
Prospective, randomized study.
Setting
Operating room of a university hospital.
Patients
120 ASA physical status I, II, and III adult patients undergoing elective surgery requiring general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation.
Interventions
Patients were randomly allocated to two groups (n = 60 each); both groups received general anesthesia and neuromuscular relaxation. A conventional ETT was styleted and then bent from its straight configuration just above the cuff, either at 60° or 90° against its concave natural curve (reverse loading). Four attending anesthesiologists, who were blinded as to stylet assignment (the 60° or 90° group), intubated the tracheas of all patients with the GVL using either the primary or secondary stylet.
Measurements
The primary outcome was success of orotracheal intubation in 62 seconds or less. The secondary outcome was actual time to intubation (TTI).
Main Results
The odds ratio (OR) for intubation success was higher in the 90° group than the 60° group (OR = 10.41; P < 0.03), as evidenced by 59 of 60 patients whose tracheas were intubated successfully within 62 seconds, compared with 51 of 60 patients in the 60° group. Seven of the 9 failures were due to inability of the 60° stylet to reach the glottic opening. The three remaining failures were associated with TTI of more than 62 seconds.
Conclusions
The 90° angled malleable stylet with reverse loading of the ETT provided more reliable ETT delivery to the glottic opening and had a higher success rate than the 60° stylet.
Keywords: Endotracheal tube, GlideScope video laryngoscope, Orotracheal intubation
To access this article, please choose from the options below
☆ Presented in part at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, Orlando, FL, Oct. 18-22, 2008.
☆☆ Disclosure: At the time of this trial, one GlideScope video laryngoscope system was loaned to us by Verathon Medical, Inc., Bothell, WA, USA. All other support was derived from institutional and departmental sources.
PII: S0952-8180(10)00176-5
doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2009.10.008
© 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
