Anaesthesia protocol evaluation of the videolaryngoscopy with the McGrath MAC and direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in 1000 patients undergoing rapid sequence induction: the randomised multicentre LARA trial study protocol

Marc Kriege, Philipp Lang, Christoph Lang, Nina Pirlich, Eva-Verena Griemert, Florian Heid, Eva Wittenmeier, Irene Schmidtmann, W Schmidbauer, Christoph Jänig, Johannes Jungbecker, Oliver Kunitz, Maximilian Strate, Axel Schmutz, Marc Kriege, Philipp Lang, Christoph Lang, Nina Pirlich, Eva-Verena Griemert, Florian Heid, Eva Wittenmeier, Irene Schmidtmann, W Schmidbauer, Christoph Jänig, Johannes Jungbecker, Oliver Kunitz, Maximilian Strate, Axel Schmutz

Abstract

Introduction: Rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia is indicated in patients with an increased risk of pulmonary aspiration. The main objective of the technique is to reduce the critical time period between loss of airway protective reflexes and rapid inflation of the cuff of the endotracheal tube to minimise the chance of aspiration of gastric contents. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the importance of first-pass intubation success to ensure patient and healthcare worker safety. The aim of this study is to compare the first-pass intubation success rate (FPS) using the videolaryngoscopy compared with conventional direct laryngoscopy in surgical patients with a high risk of pulmonary aspiration.

Methods and analysis: The LARA trial is a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Consecutive patients requiring tracheal intubation are randomly allocated to either the McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope or direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The expected rate of FPS is 92% in the McGrath group and 82% in the Macintosh group. Each group must include a total of 500 patients to achieve 90% power for detecting a difference at the 5% significance level. Successful intubation with the FPS is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints are the time to intubation, the number of intubation attempts, the necessity of airway management alternatives, the visualisation of the glottis using the Cormack and Lehane Score and the Percentage Of Glottic Opening Score and definite adverse events.

Ethics and dissemination: The project is approved by the local ethics committee of the Medical Association of the Rhineland Palatine state (registration number: 2020-15502) and medical ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (registration number: 21-1303). The results of this study will be made available in form of manuscripts for publication and presentations at national and international meetings.

Trial registration: NCT04794764.

Keywords: adult anaesthesia; adult intensive & critical care; surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

References

    1. Stept WJ, Safar P. Rapid induction-intubation for prevention of gastric-content aspiration. Anesth Analg 1970;49:633???636–6. 10.1213/00000539-197007000-00027
    1. Thwaites AJ, Rice CP, Smith I. Rapid sequence induction: a questionnaire survey of its routine conduct and continued management during a failed intubation. Anaesthesia 1999;54:376–81. 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00738.x
    1. Morris J, Cook TM. Rapid sequence induction: a national survey of practice. Anaesthesia 2001;56:1090–115. 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2001.01962.x
    1. Koerber JP, Roberts GEW, Whitaker R, et al. . Variation in rapid sequence induction techniques: current practice in Wales. Anaesthesia 2009;64:54–9. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05681.x
    1. Mort TC. Emergency tracheal intubation: complications associated with repeated laryngoscopic attempts. Anesth Analg 2004;99:607–13. 10.1213/01.ANE.0000122825.04923.15
    1. Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Fourth national audit project. Br J Anaesth 2011;106:617–31.
    1. Kleine-Brueggeney M, Buttenberg M, Greif R, et al. . Evaluation of three unchannelled videolaryngoscopes and the MacIntosh laryngoscope in patients with a simulated difficult airway: a randomised, controlled trial. Anaesthesia 2017;72:370–8. 10.1111/anae.13714
    1. Taylor AM, Peck M, Launcelott S, et al. . The McGrath® series 5 videolaryngoscope vs the MacIntosh laryngoscope: a randomised, controlled trial in patients with a simulated difficult airway. Anaesthesia 2013;68:142–7. 10.1111/anae.12075
    1. Serocki G, Bein B, Scholz J, et al. . Management of the predicted difficult airway: a comparison of conventional blade laryngoscopy with video-assisted blade laryngoscopy and the GlideScope. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2010;27:24–30. 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32832d328d
    1. Piepho T, Fortmueller K, Heid FM, et al. . Performance of the C-MAC video laryngoscope in patients after a limited glottic view using MacIntosh laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 2011;66:1101–5. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06872.x
    1. Aziz MF, Dillman D, Fu R, et al. . Comparative effectiveness of the C-MAC video laryngoscope versus direct laryngoscopy in the setting of the predicted difficult airway. Anesthesiology 2012;116:629–36. 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318246ea34
    1. Sargin M, Uluer MS. Comparison of McGrath(®) Series 5 video laryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope: A prospective, randomised trial in patients with normal airways. Pak J Med Sci 2016;32:869–74. 10.12669/pjms.324.10037
    1. Russell T, Slinger P, Roscoe A, et al. . A randomised controlled trial comparing the GlideScope(®) and the Macintosh laryngoscope for double-lumen endobronchial intubation. Anaesthesia 2013;68:1253–8. 10.1111/anae.12322
    1. McElwain J, Laffey JG. Comparison of the C-MAC®, Airtraq®, and MacIntosh laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth 2011;107:258–64. 10.1093/bja/aer099
    1. Cavus E, Thee C, Moeller T, et al. . A randomised, controlled crossover comparison of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy in 150 patients during routine induction of anaesthesia. BMC Anesthesiol 2011;11:6. 10.1186/1471-2253-11-6
    1. Piepho T, Cavus E, Noppens R, et al. . S1 guidelines on airway management: guideline of the German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine. Anaesthesist 2015;64 Suppl 1:27–40. 10.1007/s00101-015-0109-4
    1. Law JA, Broemling N, Cooper RM, et al. . The difficult airway with recommendations for management--part 1--difficult tracheal intubation encountered in an unconscious/induced patient. Can J Anaesth 2013;60:1089–118. 10.1007/s12630-013-0019-3
    1. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, et al. . Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task force on management of the difficult airway. Anesthesiology 2013;118:251–70. 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31827773b2
    1. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, et al. . Difficult airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth 2015;115:827–48. 10.1093/bja/aev371
    1. Dhillon RS, Rowin WA, Humphries RS, et al. . Aerosolisation during tracheal intubation and extubation in an operating theatre setting. Anaesthesia 2021;76:182–8. 10.1111/anae.15301
    1. Cook TM, El-Boghdadly K, McGuire B, et al. . Consensus guidelines for managing the airway in patients with COVID-19: guidelines from the difficult airway Society, the association of anaesthetists the intensive care Society, the faculty of intensive care medicine and the Royal College of anaesthetists. Anaesthesia 2020;75:785–99. 10.1111/anae.15054
    1. Noppens RR, Möbus S, Heid F, et al. . Evaluation of the McGrath series 5 videolaryngoscope after failed direct laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 2010;65:716–20. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06388.x
    1. Hoshijima H, Mihara T, Maruyama K, et al. . McGrath videolaryngoscope versus MacIntosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. J Clin Anesth 2018;46:25–32. 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.12.030
    1. Pieters BMA, Maas EHA, Knape JTA, et al. . Videolaryngoscopy vs. direct laryngoscopy use by experienced anaesthetists in patients with known difficult airways: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia 2017;72:1532–41. 10.1111/anae.14057
    1. Downey AW, Duggan LV, Adam Law J. A systematic review of meta-analyses comparing direct laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopy. Can J Anaesth 2021;68:1–9. 10.1007/s12630-021-01921-7
    1. Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, et al. . Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;11:CD011136. 10.1002/14651858.CD011136.pub2
    1. Maharaj CH, Costello JF, Higgins BD, et al. . Learning and performance of tracheal intubation by novice personnel: a comparison of the Airtraq and MacIntosh laryngoscope. Anaesthesia 2006;61:671–7. 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2006.04653.x
    1. Sulser S, Ubmann D, Schlaepfer M, et al. . C-MAC videolaryngoscope compared with direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation in an emergency department. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2016;33:943–8. 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000525
    1. Aziz MF, Abrons RO, Cattano D, et al. . First-attempt intubation success of video laryngoscopy in patients with anticipated difficult direct laryngoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the C-MAC D-Blade versus the GlideScope in a mixed provider and diverse patient population. Anesth Analg 2016;122:740–50. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001084
    1. Sakles JC, Mosier J, Chiu S, et al. . A comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope to the MacIntosh direct laryngoscope for intubation in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2012;60:739–48. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2012.03.031
    1. Vassiliadis J, Tzannes A, Hitos K, et al. . Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope with direct MacIntosh laryngoscopy in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas 2015;27:119–25. 10.1111/1742-6723.12358
    1. Walls RM, Brown CA, Bair AE, et al. . Emergency airway management: a multi-center report of 8937 emergency department Intubations. J Emerg Med 2011;41:347–54. 10.1016/j.jemermed.2010.02.024
    1. Tayal VS, Riggs RW, Marx JA, et al. . Rapid-sequence intubation at an emergency medicine residency: success rate and adverse events during a two-year period. Acad Emerg Med 1999;6:31–7. 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00091.x
    1. Sagarin MJ, Barton ED, Chng Y-M, et al. . Airway management by US and Canadian emergency medicine residents: a multicenter analysis of more than 6,000 endotracheal intubation attempts. Ann Emerg Med 2005;46:328–36. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.01.009
    1. Bair AE, Filbin MR, Kulkarni RG, et al. . The failed intubation attempt in the emergency department: analysis of prevalence, rescue techniques, and personnel. J Emerg Med 2002;23:131–40. 10.1016/S0736-4679(02)00501-2
    1. Fogg T, Annesley N, Hitos K, et al. . Prospective observational study of the practice of endotracheal intubation in the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia. Emerg Med Australas 2012;24:617–24. 10.1111/1742-6723.12005
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. . Spirit 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013;346:e7586. 10.1136/bmj.e7586
    1. Janssens M, Lamy M. Airway difficulty score (ads): a new score to predict difficulty in airway management. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2000;17:35. 10.1097/00003643-200000002-00114
    1. McCrory JW, Matthews JN. Comparison of four methods of preoxygenation. Br J Anaesth 1990;64:571–6. 10.1093/bja/64.5.571
    1. Tanoubi I, Drolet P, Donati F. Optimizing preoxygenation in adults. Can J Anaesth 2009;56:449–66. 10.1007/s12630-009-9084-z
    1. Murphy C, Wong DT. Airway management and oxygenation in obese patients. Can J Anaesth 2013;60:929–45. 10.1007/s12630-013-9991-x
    1. Adnet F, Borron SW, Racine SX, et al. . The intubation difficulty scale (IDS): proposal and evaluation of a new score characterizing the complexity of endotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1997;87:1290–7. 10.1097/00000542-199712000-00005
    1. Kasuya Y, Takahashi E, Nagai M, et al. . [Comparison of tracheal intubation performance between macintosh direct laryngoscope and McGRATH® MAC video laryngoscope among anesthesia trainees]. Masui 2015;64:1291–6.
    1. Ilyas S, Symons J, Bradley WPL, et al. . A prospective randomised controlled trial comparing tracheal intubation plus manual in-line stabilisation of the cervical spine using the Macintosh laryngoscope vs the McGrath(®) Series 5 videolaryngoscope. Anaesthesia 2014;69:1345–50. 10.1111/anae.12804

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren