Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan
{"title":"Macintosh、Glidescope和Airtraq喉镜气管插管成功率的比较","authors":"Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan","doi":"10.5222/jarss.2021.05025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.","PeriodicalId":36000,"journal":{"name":"Anestezi Dergisi","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Endotracheal Intubation Successes with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq Laryngoscopes\",\"authors\":\"Tuna Ertürk, Hasan Ömür Özkan, G. İnangil, Fuat Gürbüz, S. Özkan\",\"doi\":\"10.5222/jarss.2021.05025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anestezi Dergisi\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anestezi Dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5222/jarss.2021.05025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anestezi Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5222/jarss.2021.05025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Endotracheal Intubation Successes with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq Laryngoscopes
Objective: Successful airway management is the primary and most crucial step required for patient safety in anesthetic application. Due to the increase in the variety of materials used for ventilation and intubation in recent years, successful airway management has become more advantageous in difficult airway management. The development of Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes are used as alternative laryngoscopy devices. The aim of the present prospective randomized study is to compare superiority of the success of endotracheal intubation performed with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in terms of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of attempts, and use of facilitating maneuvers required for intubation. Methods: Totally 180 patients over 18 years of age, in ASA I-II physiological risk group, who would undergo elective surgery were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic classification, intubation duration, number of intubation attempts, facilitating maneuvers required for intubation, and complications related to intubation were recorded and compared in patients who were intubated with Macintosh laryngoscope in Group-A, Glidescope laryngoscope in Group-B, and Airtraq laryngoscope in Group-C. Results: It was found that demographic data were similar between groups. Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic score, intubation duration, number of attempts and use of facilitating maneuver parameters of the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups were similar and superior to the Macintosh group. In terms of intubation success rates and complications related to intubation, the frequency of the Macintosh laryngoscope group was similar to the Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscope groups. Conclusion: According to the result of the study, it was concluded that Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes provide a better view of glotis and ease intubation compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. However, we did not find any difference in intubation success and complication rates between the groups.