2021
Videolaryngoscopy vs. Direct Laryngoscopy for Elective Airway Management in Paediatric Anaesthesia A prospective randomised controlled trial
KLABUSAYOVÁ, Eva, Jozef KLUČKA, Martina KOSINOVÁ, Michaela ŤOUKÁLKOVÁ, Roman ŠTOUDEK et. al.Základní údaje
Originální název
Videolaryngoscopy vs. Direct Laryngoscopy for Elective Airway Management in Paediatric Anaesthesia A prospective randomised controlled trial
Autoři
KLABUSAYOVÁ, Eva (203 Česká republika, domácí), Jozef KLUČKA (703 Slovensko, domácí), Martina KOSINOVÁ (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí), Michaela ŤOUKÁLKOVÁ (203 Česká republika, domácí), Roman ŠTOUDEK (203 Česká republika, domácí), Milan KRATOCHVÍL (703 Slovensko, domácí), Lukáš MAREČEK (203 Česká republika, domácí), Michal SVOBODA (203 Česká republika), Petr JABANDŽIEV (203 Česká republika, domácí), Milan URÍK (703 Slovensko, domácí) a Petr ŠTOURAČ (203 Česká republika, domácí)
Vydání
European Journal of Anaesthesiology, Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2021, 0265-0215
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
30223 Anaesthesiology
Stát vydavatele
Spojené státy
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Odkazy
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 4.183
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14110/21:00122591
Organizační jednotka
Lékařská fakulta
UT WoS
000703607400011
Klíčová slova anglicky
Videolaryngoscopy; Direct Laryngoscopy; Elective Airway Management; Paediatric Anaesthesia
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 17. 5. 2022 10:44, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová
Anotace
V originále
BACKGROUND The indirect visualisation of the glottic area with a videolaryngoscope could improve intubation conditions which may possibly lead to a higher success rate of the first intubation attempt. OBJECTIVE Comparison of videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for elective airway management in paediatric patients. DESIGN Prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTINGS Operating room. PARTICIPANTS 535 paediatric patients undergoing elective anaesthesia with tracheal intubation. 501 patients were included in the final analysis. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly allocated to the videolaryngoscopy group (n = 265) and to the direct laryngoscopy group (n = 269) for the primary airway management. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The first attempt intubation success rate was assessed as the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes were defined as: the time to successful intubation (time to the first EtCO2 wave), the overall intubation success rate, the number of intubation attempts, the incidence of complications, and the impact of the length of the operator's clinical practice. RESULTS The study was terminated after the planned interim analysis for futility. There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. The first attempt intubation success rate was lower in the videolaryngoscopy group; 86.8% (n = 211) vs. 92.6% (n = 239), P = 0.046. The mean time to the first EtCO2 wave was longer in the videolaryngoscopy group at 39.0 s +/- 36.7 compared to the direct laryngoscopy group, 23.6 s +/- 24.7 (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the overall intubation success rate, in the incidence of complications nor significant difference based on the length of the clinical practice of the operator. CONCLUSIONS The first attempt intubation success rate was lower in the videolaryngoscopy group in comparison to the direct laryngoscopy group. The time needed for successful intubation with videolaryngoscopy was longer compared with direct laryngoscopy.
Návaznosti
| MUNI/A/1153/2020, interní kód MU |
| ||
| MUNI/A/1178/2020, interní kód MU |
| ||
| ROZV/28/LF8/2020, interní kód MU |
| ||
| ROZV/28/LF9/2020, interní kód MU |
|