Details
Category: Volume 08 Issue 02 February 2020
Hits: 898

Title: Evaluation of Intubating Parameters in Patients with Difficult Airway Using King Vision and Endolite

Authors: Dr B.Murali Krishna MD, Dr Kota Mythili

 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v8i2.136

Abstract

   

Background: Airway management is often considered one of the most challenging tasks encountered in anaesthesia practice. When a conventionally trained anesthesiologist experiences difficulty with mask ventilation of upper airway or difficulty with intubation, it is termed difficult airway23. Any failure to intubate the trachea can cause morbidity and is the leading cause of mortality in anaesthesia. The incidence of failed intubation is 0.13-0.3% in the operating rooms24.

Objective: to compare the overall success of intubation in King Vision and Endolite groups, in difficult airway management and also compare number of attempts taken for intubation and time taken for intubation.

Methods: this is a study of randomized comparative study, with sixty patients with predicted difficult airway are recruited into the study. The patients are randomly allotted into group KV and group EL with 30 patients in each group. A standard anaesthesia technique is employed to intubate the patients. The overall success of intubation of each device is noted. Along with it success at first attempt, time taken for intubation and optimization maneuvers are noted and analysed.

Results: Data of sixty patients are analysed. The overall success of intubation by both devices is 100%. However, the success at first attempt in KV group was 96.66%(29/30), and that of EL group was 73.33%(22/30). The p-value was 0.026 and was said to be statistically significant. The time taken for intubation in this study was 22.44± 3.74 s in KV group and 22.9±4.18 s in EL group, the p-value was 0.65.

Conclusion: this study demonstrated that both king vision laryngoscope and endo lite stylet can be safely used in patients with difficult airway. Endo lite has taken mare number of attempts to intubate than king vision, because of the inherent semiblind technique of intubation. There is no significant difference in intubation time between both the groups.

References

  1. Collins SR, Blank RS. Fiberoptic intubation: an overview and update. Respiratory Care2014; 59: 865– 80
  2. Wong J, Lee JSE, Wong TGL, Iqbal R, Wong P. Fibreoptic intubation in airway management:a review article. Singapore Med J. 2019;60:110–118.
  3. Saracoglu KT, Eti Z, Gogus FY: Airtraq optical laryngoscope: advantages and disadvantages. Middle East J Anesthesiol; 2013, 22:135-141.
  4. Davis L, Cook‐Sather SD, Schreiner MS. Lighted Stylet tracheal intubation: a review. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2000; 90: 745– 56.
  5. Maharaj CH, O’Croinin D, Curley G, Harte BH, Laffey JG. A comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq or theMacintosh laryngoscope in routine airway management: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Anaesthesia 2006; 61:1093–9.
  6. Prajakta M. Tayade1 ,Kirti A. Kundalwal2, Rohit P. Sancheti. A Comparative Study of Hemodynamic Response and Ease of Intubation in Patients Intubated by Direct Laryngoscopy Versus Lightwand. Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia 2018; 5(11): 1880­-1887.
  7. Maharaj CH, Higgins B, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Evaluation of ease of intubation with the Airtraq®or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy – a manikin study. Anaesthesia 2006; 61: 469– 77
  8. Biro P, Weiss M, Gerber A, Pasch T. Comparison of a new video-optical intubation stylet versus the conventional malleable stylet in simulated dif®cult tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 886-9
  9. Y. Park, J. Y. Kim and J. S. Lee Tracheal intubation using the AIRTRAQ : A comparison with the lightwand .2010 journal of anaesthesia Great Britain Ireland. Anaesthesia.2010;65:729-732.
  10. Priyanka moon, R D patel,  VidyaBhagat. A Prospective randomized control study of tracheal intubation using airtraq and comparing it with the lightwand in adult patient global journal for research analysis.2019;vol 8,no 6
  1. Jain M, Garg S, Rastogi B, Singh V, Gupta K, et al. (2014) Comparative Evaluation of Lightwand (Lighted Stylet) with Direct Laryngoscopy on Hemodynamic Response-A Prospective Study. J AnesthClin Res 5:419. doi: 10.4172/2155-6148.1000419
  2. Durga P, Kaur J, Ahmed SY, Kaniti G, Ramachandran G. Comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq® and Mc Coy laryngoscope in the presence of rigid cervical collar simulating cervical immobilisation for traumatic cervical spine injury. Indian J Anaesth2012;56:529-34.
  3. Maharaj CH, Higgins B, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Evaluation of ease of intubation with the Airtraq®or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy – a manikin study. Anaesthesia 2006; 61: 469– 77
  4. Wu Cn, Ma Wh, Wei Jq, Wei Hf, Cen Qy, et al. Laryngoscope and a New Tracheal Tube Assist Lightwand Intubation in Difficult Airways due to Unstable Cervical Spine. PLOS ONE 2015; 10(3): e0120231.
  5. Durga P, Kaur J, Ahmed SY, Kaniti G, Ramachandran G. Comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq® and Mc Coy laryngoscope in the presence of rigid cervical collar simulating cervical immobilisation for traumatic cervical spine injury. Indian J Anaesth2012;56:529-34.
  6. Koh JC, Lee JS, Lee YW, Chang CH. Comparison of the laryngeal view during intubation using Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine immobilization and mouth opening limitation. Korean J Anesthesiol 2010;59:314‑8.
  7. Ashraf E. Alzeftawy, Ahmad A. El-Daba Awake orotracheal intubation using fiberoptic bronchoscope versus Airtraq laryngoscope in morbidly obese patients. Ain-Shams Journal of Anaesthesiology 2017, 10:177–181.
  8. Turkstra TP, Craen RA, Pelz DM, Gelb AW. Cervical spine motion: a fluoroscopic comparison during intubation with lighted stylet, Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscope. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2005; 101: 910–5.
  9. Yang KH, Jeong CH, Song KC, Song JY, Song JH, Byon HJ. Comparison between Glidescope and Lightwand for tracheal intubation in patients with a simulated difficult airway. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2015 Feb;68(1):22-6. DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2015.68.1.22. Epub 2015 Jan 28. PMID: 25664151; PMCID: PMC4318860.
  10. Agrò F, Benumof JL, Carassiti M, Cataldo R, Gherardi S, Barzoi G. Efficacy of a combined technique using the Trachlight together with direct laryngoscopy under simulated difficult airway conditions in 350 anesthetized patients. Can J Anaesth. 2002; 49: 525–526. PMID: 11983674
  11. Fisher QA, Tunkel DE. Lightwand intubation of infants and children. J ClinAnesth. 1997; 9: 275–279.
  12. Amir SH, Ali QE, Bansal S. A comparative evaluation of Video Stylet and flexible fibre-optic bronchoscope in the performance of intubation in adult patients. Indian J Anaesth2017;61:321-5.
  13. American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway Practice guidelines for management of the difficult   airway: 2003;98:1269,1277.doi:10.1097/00000542-200305000-0003.
  14. Lewis AR, Hodzovic I, Whelan J, WIlkes AR, Bowler I, Whitfield R: A paramedic study comparing the use of Airtraq, Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in simulated prehospital airway scenarios. Anaesthesia; 2010, 65:1187-1193.

Corresponding Author

Dr Kota Mythili

Post graduate, Department of Anesthesiology, Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam