Loading…
Videolaryngoscope versus Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adults with obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Videolaryngoscopy has become more common since the 2000s. Despite several anecdotal reports in the literature, it remains unclear whether videolaryngoscopy is superior to direct Macintosh laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in adults with obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis focused on...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of clinical anesthesia 2018-02, Vol.44, p.69-75 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Videolaryngoscopy has become more common since the 2000s. Despite several anecdotal reports in the literature, it remains unclear whether videolaryngoscopy is superior to direct Macintosh laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in adults with obesity. This systematic review and meta-analysis focused on prospective randomised trials comparing videolaryngoscopes with the Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adults with obesity.
Systematic review, Meta-analysis
Operating room, Obesity patients
Data on success rate, intubation time, and glottic visualisation during tracheal intubation were extracted from the identified studies. In a subgroup analysis, we also compared the parameters for videolaryngoscopes with a tracheal tube guide channel and those without a tracheal tube guide channel. Data from individual trials were combined, and the DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model was used to calculate either the pooled relative risk (RR) or the weighted mean difference (WMD) as well as the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Eleven articles describing 13 trials met the inclusion criteria. The performance of videolaryngoscopes was superior to that of the Macintosh laryngoscope for all outcomes. (Success rate; RR=1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.18, p=0.001, I2=63%, Intubation time; WMD=−16.1, 95% CI −31.1 to −1.10, p=0.04, I2=97%, Glottic visualisation; RR=1.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.30, p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0952-8180 1873-4529 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.11.008 |