			Home About us Contact

Video Laryngoscope (video + laryngoscope)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

A comparison between the GlideScope® Video Laryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in paediatric patients with difficult airways , a pilot study

ANAESTHESIA, Issue 4 2010
C. Karsli
Summary The GlideScope® Video Laryngoscope may improve the view seen at laryngoscopy in adults who have a difficult airway. Manikin studies and case reports suggest it may also be useful in children, although prospective studies are limited in number. We hypothesised that the paediatric GlideScope will result in an improved view seen at laryngoscopy in children with a known difficult airway, compared to direct laryngoscopy. Eighteen children with a history of difficult or failed intubation were prospectively recruited. After inhalational induction, each patient had laryngoscopy performed using a standard blade followed by GlideScope videolaryngoscopy. The GlideScope yielded a significantly improved laryngoscopic view, both with (p = 0.003) and without (p = 0.004) laryngeal pressure. The mean (SD) time taken to achieve the optimal view was 20 (8)s using conventional laryngoscopy and 26 (22)s using the GlideScope® (p = 0.5). The GlideScope® significantly improves the laryngoscopic view obtained in children with a difficult airway. [source]

Use of the McGrath video laryngoscope in awake patients

ANAESTHESIA, Issue 8 2009
B. E. McGuire
Summary Reported are three cases of successful tracheal intubation using the McGrath Video Laryngoscope in awake patients. All three patients had predicted difficult direct laryngoscopy and signs of upper airway obstruction. [source]

The GlideScope Ranger® video laryngoscope can be useful in airway management of entrapped patients

ACTA ANAESTHESIOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, Issue 10 2009
A. R. NAKSTAD
Background: Airway management of entrapped patients is challenging and alternatives to endotracheal intubation with a Macintosh laryngoscope must be considered. In this study, the GlideScope Ranger® video laryngoscope has been evaluated as an alternative to standard laryngoscopy. Methods: Eight anaesthesiologists from a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service intubated the trachea of a Laerdal SimMan® manikin using the studied laryngoscopes in two scenarios: (A) unrestricted access to the manikin in an ambulance and (B) no access from the head end, simulating an entrapped patient. The time used to secure the airway and the scored level of difficulty were the main variables. Results: In scenario A, all anaesthesiologists managed to secure the airway using both techniques within the 60-s time limit. In scenario B, all secured the airway when using the video laryngoscope, while 50% succeeded with endotracheal intubation using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The difference in the success rate was statististically significant (P=0.025). There were no significant differences in the time spent on endotracheal intubation in the two scenarios or between the devices. All stated that the availability of a video laryngsoscope would make drug-facilitated intubation a realistic alternative when access to patients is limited. The lack of visual control when using the Macintosh laryngoscope excludes this technique in real-life settings. Conclusion: This study suggests that the Glidescope Ranger® may be merited in situations requiring endotracheal intubation by an experienced intubator in patient entrapment. Further studies are required to clarify whether performance in patients mimics that in a manikin. [source]

A comparison of the STORZ video laryngoscope and standard direct laryngoscopy for intubation in the Pediatric airway , a randomized clinical trial

PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, Issue 11 2009
ARNIM VLATTEN MD
Summary Introduction:, Direct laryngoscopy can be challenging in infants and neonates. Even with an optimal line of sight to the glottic opening, the viewing angle has been measured at 15°. The STORZ DCI video laryngoscope (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) incorporates a fiberoptic camera in the light source of a standard laryngoscope of variable sizes. The image is displayed on a screen with a viewing angle of 80°. We studied the effectiveness of the STORZ DCI as an airway tool compared to standard direct laryngoscopy in children with normal airway. Methods:, In this prospective, randomized study, 56 children (ages 4 years or younger) undergoing elective surgery with the need for endotracheal intubation were divided into two groups: children who underwent standard direct laryngoscopy using a Miller 1 or Macintosh 2 blade (DL) and children who underwent video laryngoscopy using the STORZ DCI video laryngoscope with a Miller 1 blade (VL). Time to best view (TTBV), time to intubate (TTI), Cormack,Lehane (CL), and percentage of glottis opening seen (POGO) score were recorded. Results:, TTBV in DL was 5.5 (4,8) s and 7 (4.2,9) s in VL. TTI in DL was 21 (17,29) s and in VL 27 (22,37) s (P = 0.006). The view as assessed by POGO score was 97.5% (60,100%) in DL and 100% (100,100%) in the VL (P = 0.003). Data are presented as median and interquartile range and analyzed using t -test. Discussion:, This study demonstrates that the STORZ DCI video laryngoscope provides an improved view to the glottis in children with normal airway anatomy, but requires a longer time for intubation. [source]

Comparison of the Cobalt Glidescope® video laryngoscope with conventional laryngoscopy in simulated normal and difficult infant airways,

PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, Issue 11 2009
MICHELLE WHITE MB ChB DCH FRCA
Summary Aim:, To evaluate the new pediatric Glidescope® (Cobalt GVL® Stat) by assessing the time taken to tracheal intubation under normal and difficult intubation conditions. We hypothesized that the Glidescope® would perform as well as conventional laryngoscopy. Background:, A new pediatric Glidescope® became available in October 2008. It combines a disposable, sterile laryngoscope blade and a reusable video baton. It is narrower and longer than the previous version and is available in a greater range of sizes more appropriate to pediatric use. Methods:, We performed a randomized study of 32 pediatric anesthetists and intensivists to compare the Cobalt GVL® Stat with the Miller laryngoscope under simulated normal and difficult airway conditions in a pediatric manikin. Results:, We found no difference in time taken to tracheal intubation using the Glidescope® or Miller laryngoscope under normal (29.3 vs 26.2 s, P = 0.36) or difficult (45.8 and 44.4 s, P = 0.84) conditions. Subjective evaluation of devices for field of view (excellent: 59% vs 53%) and ease of use (excellent: 69% vs 63%) was similar for the Miller laryngoscope and Glidescope®, respectively. However, only 34% of participants said that they would definitely use the Glidescope® in an emergency compared with 66% who would be willing to use the Miller laryngoscope. Conclusions:, The new Glidescope® performs as well as the Miller laryngoscope under simulated normal and difficult airway conditions. [source]

Difficult airway management with the STORZ video laryngoscope in a child with Robin Sequence

PEDIATRIC ANESTHESIA, Issue 7 2009
Arnim Vlatten
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Use of the McGrath video laryngoscope in awake patients

A new video laryngoscope

ANAESTHESIA, Issue 4 2004
A. C. D. Thompson
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Ease of intubation with the GlideScope or Airway Scope by novice operators in simulated easy and difficult airways , a manikin study,

ANAESTHESIA, Issue 2 2009
B. H. Tan
Summary The GlideScope and Airway Scope are video laryngoscopes that have been found to be useful in difficult airway situations. With the GlideScope, there are frequently problems associated with insertion of the tracheal tube despite the ability to view the glottis. The Airway Scope's imaging system and disposable PBlade aid alignment of the PBlade with the glottis and guide insertion of the tracheal tube. We performed a randomised crossover study of 20 medical students using both videolaryngoscopes in a manikin, with simulated normal and difficult airway scenarios. We found that the students required less time for tracheal intubation with the Airway Scope and reported greater ease of intubation with the Airway Scope in both scenarios. A greater number of students chose the Airway Scope as their device of choice. Our results suggest that the Airway Scope's features may improve the ease of tracheal intubation compared with the GlideScope. [source]