Conventional videolaryngoscope versus 3D printed videolaryngoscope

Kamil Varlık Erel, Nagehan Ümit Karacan
{"title":"Conventional videolaryngoscope versus 3D printed videolaryngoscope","authors":"Kamil Varlık Erel, Nagehan Ümit Karacan","doi":"10.23950/jcmk/13765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<b>Background and objectives:</b> In patients with Covid-19, using a video laryngoscope as an alternative to direct laryngoscopy is recommended to protect the intubator from infection and reduce intubation failures due to personal protective equipment. The cost of video laryngoscopes limits their availability in all healthcare institutions. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 3D printed video laryngoscope and conventional video laryngoscope on intubation.<br /> <b>Material and methods:</b> 30 ASA I-II patients who were not considered to have a difficult airway were included in the study after obtaining the ethics committee approval from Adnan Menderes University Clinical Research Ethics Committee. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, group 1 and group 2. After the induction of anesthesia under standard monitoring, the Cormack Lehane score was recorded by direct laryngoscopy in all patients. Patients in group 1 were intubated with a 3D-printed video laryngoscope. In contrast, patients in group 2 were intubated with a conventional video laryngoscope (STORZ C-mac videolaryngoscope). Intubation time, number of attempts, and hemodynamic values of patients with early postoperative complications were recorded. The data were recorded and statistically evaluated.<br /> <b>Results:</b> There were no significant differences between the groups regarding demographic data, BMI, and hemodynamic data. The Cormack Lehane score was calculated as 1.6±0.51 in group 1 and 1.4±0.51 in group 2 (p=0.38). Intubation times of the groups were 32.6±18 s and 27.06±11.37 s, respectively (p=0.4). The number of intubation attempts was 1.2±0.63 in group 1 and 1±0.01 in group 2 (p=0.31). The image quality of the camera by the intubator, intubation conditions, and intubation satisfaction was similar in the two groups.<br /> <b>Conclusion:</b><b> </b>Comparing a 3D-printed videolaryngoscope with a conventional videolaryngoscope, no differences were observed in intubation times, number of intubation attempts, hemodynamic changes, and early postoperative complications. Intubation satisfaction values by the practitioner were found to be similar. It was concluded that the 3D-printed videolaryngoscope, which is cost-effective and easy to access, can be used instead of conventional videolaryngoscope in patients with a normal airway.","PeriodicalId":32426,"journal":{"name":"Kazakstannyn Klinikalyk Medicinasy","volume":"129 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kazakstannyn Klinikalyk Medicinasy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23950/jcmk/13765","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: In patients with Covid-19, using a video laryngoscope as an alternative to direct laryngoscopy is recommended to protect the intubator from infection and reduce intubation failures due to personal protective equipment. The cost of video laryngoscopes limits their availability in all healthcare institutions. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of 3D printed video laryngoscope and conventional video laryngoscope on intubation.
Material and methods: 30 ASA I-II patients who were not considered to have a difficult airway were included in the study after obtaining the ethics committee approval from Adnan Menderes University Clinical Research Ethics Committee. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, group 1 and group 2. After the induction of anesthesia under standard monitoring, the Cormack Lehane score was recorded by direct laryngoscopy in all patients. Patients in group 1 were intubated with a 3D-printed video laryngoscope. In contrast, patients in group 2 were intubated with a conventional video laryngoscope (STORZ C-mac videolaryngoscope). Intubation time, number of attempts, and hemodynamic values of patients with early postoperative complications were recorded. The data were recorded and statistically evaluated.
Results: There were no significant differences between the groups regarding demographic data, BMI, and hemodynamic data. The Cormack Lehane score was calculated as 1.6±0.51 in group 1 and 1.4±0.51 in group 2 (p=0.38). Intubation times of the groups were 32.6±18 s and 27.06±11.37 s, respectively (p=0.4). The number of intubation attempts was 1.2±0.63 in group 1 and 1±0.01 in group 2 (p=0.31). The image quality of the camera by the intubator, intubation conditions, and intubation satisfaction was similar in the two groups.
Conclusion: Comparing a 3D-printed videolaryngoscope with a conventional videolaryngoscope, no differences were observed in intubation times, number of intubation attempts, hemodynamic changes, and early postoperative complications. Intubation satisfaction values by the practitioner were found to be similar. It was concluded that the 3D-printed videolaryngoscope, which is cost-effective and easy to access, can be used instead of conventional videolaryngoscope in patients with a normal airway.
传统视频喉镜与3D打印视频喉镜
背景和目标:</b>对于Covid-19患者,建议使用视频喉镜替代直接喉镜检查,以保护插管器免受感染,并减少因个人防护设备导致的插管失败。视频喉镜的成本限制了其在所有医疗机构的可用性。本研究旨在比较3D打印视频喉镜与传统视频喉镜在气管插管中的疗效和安全性。材料和方法:</b>经Adnan Menderes大学临床研究伦理委员会批准,将30例不认为存在气道困难的ASA I-II患者纳入研究。患者随机分为两组:1组和2组。在标准监测下诱导麻醉后,所有患者均通过直接喉镜记录Cormack Lehane评分。第一组患者采用3d打印视频喉镜插管。第二组患者采用传统视频喉镜(STORZ C-mac视频喉镜)插管。记录术后早期并发症患者的插管时间、插管次数及血流动力学值。记录数据并进行统计评价。<br />& lt; b>结果:& lt; / b>在人口统计数据、BMI和血流动力学数据方面,两组间没有显著差异。Cormack Lehane评分1组为1.6±0.51分,2组为1.4±0.51分(p=0.38)。两组插管时间分别为32.6±18 s和27.06±11.37 s (p=0.4)。组1插管次数为1.2±0.63次,组2插管次数为1±0.01次(p=0.31)。两组患者的插管器相机图像质量、插管条件和插管满意度相似。<br />& lt; b>结论:& lt; / b> & lt; b></b> 3d打印视频喉镜与传统视频喉镜比较,在插管次数、插管次数、血流动力学变化和术后早期并发症方面均无差异。医生的插管满意度值是相似的。综上所述,3d打印视频喉镜具有成本效益高、使用方便等优点,可替代传统的视频喉镜用于气道正常的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信