Comparing GlideScope Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope Regarding Hemodynamic Responses During Orotracheal Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Ali Reza Pournajafian, Mohammad Reza Ghodraty, Seyed Hamid Reza Faiz, Poupak Rahimzadeh, Hamidreza Goodarzynejad, Enseyeh Dogmehchi, Ali Reza Pournajafian, Mohammad Reza Ghodraty, Seyed Hamid Reza Faiz, Poupak Rahimzadeh, Hamidreza Goodarzynejad, Enseyeh Dogmehchi

Abstract

Background: To determine if the GlideScope® videolaryngoscope (GVL) could attenuate the hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation compared with conventional Macintosh laryngoscope.

Objectives: The aim of this relatively large randomized trial was to compare the hemodynamic stress responses during laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation using GVL versus MCL amongst healthy adult individuals receiving general anesthesia for elective surgeries.

Patients and methods: Ninety five healthy adult patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I or II that were scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to either Macintosh or GlideScope arms. All patients received a standardized protocol of general anesthesia. Hemodynamic changes associated with intubation were recorded before and at 1, 3 and 5 minutes after the intubation. The time taken to perform endotracheal intubation was also noted in both groups.

Results: Immediately before laryngoscopy (pre-laryngoscopy), the values of all hemodynamic variables did not differ significantly between the two groups (All P values > 0.05). Blood pressures and HR values changed significantly over time within the groups. Time to intubation was significantly longer in the GlideScope (15.9 ± 6.7 seconds) than in the Macintosh group (7.8 ± 3.7 sec) (P< 0.001). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in hemodynamic responses at all time points.

Conclusions: The longer intubation time using GVL suggests that the benefit of GVL could become apparent if the time taken for orotracheal intubation could be decreased in GlideScope group.

Keywords: Hemodynamic Responses; Intubation; Laryngoscopes.

Figures

Figure 1.. A GlideScope Video Laryngoscope With…
Figure 1.. A GlideScope Video Laryngoscope With Its Specific Rigid Stylet
Figure 2.. Flow Diagram of Patients Recruitment
Figure 2.. Flow Diagram of Patients Recruitment
Figure 3.. The Box-plot Graph of Comparison…
Figure 3.. The Box-plot Graph of Comparison of Intubation Time (Seconds) Between Macintosh Group and Glidescope Group
Figure 4.. Changes of Mean Rate Pressure…
Figure 4.. Changes of Mean Rate Pressure Product (Rpp) Before and After Intubation (Mean ± SD) in Two Various Laryngoscopy Methods

References

    1. Sameenakousar , Mahesh , Srinivasan KV. Comparison of fentanyl and clonidine for attenuation of the haemodynamic response to laryngocopy and endotracheal intubation. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(1):106–11. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2012/4988.2682.
    1. Ko DD, Kang H, Yang SY, Shin HY, Baek CW, Jung YH, et al. A comparison of hemodynamic changes after endotracheal intubation by the Optiscope and the conventional laryngoscope. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012;63(2):130–5. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2012.63.2.130.
    1. Kanchi M, Nair HC, Banakal S, Murthy K, Murugesan C. Haemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation in coronary artery disease: Direct versus video laryngoscopy. Indian J Anaesth. 2011;55(3):260–5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.82673.
    1. Shribman AJ, Smith G, Achola KJ. Cardiovascular and catecholamine responses to laryngoscopy with and without tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth. 1987;59(3):295–9.
    1. Davis L, Cook-Sather SD, Schreiner MS. Lighted stylet tracheal intubation: a review. Anesth Analg. 2000;90(3):745–56.
    1. Kovac AL. Controlling the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. J Clin Anesth. 1996;8(1):63–79.
    1. Kahl M, Eberhart LH, Behnke H, Sanger S, Schwarz U, Vogt S, et al. Stress response to tracheal intubation in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery: direct laryngoscopy versus an intubating laryngeal mask airway. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2004;18(3):275–80.
    1. Mort TC. Complications of emergency tracheal intubation: hemodynamic alterations--part I. J Intensive Care Med. 2007;22(3):157–65. doi: 10.1177/0885066607299525.
    1. Kihara S, Brimacombe J, Yaguchi Y, Watanabe S, Taguchi N, Komatsuzaki T. Hemodynamic responses among three tracheal intubation devices in normotensive and hypertensive patients. Anesth Analg. 2003;96(3):890–5.
    1. Foregger R. Richard von Foregger, Ph.D., 1872-1960. Manufacturer of anesthesia equipment. Anesthesiology. 1996;84(1):190–200.
    1. Pott LM, Murray WB. Review of video laryngoscopy and rigid fiberoptic laryngoscopy. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2008;21(6):750–8. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e3283184227.
    1. Xue FS, Zhang GH, Li XY, Sun HT, Li P, Li CW, et al. Comparison of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh direct laryngoscope. J Clin Anesth. 2007;19(4):245–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2006.11.004.
    1. Siddiqui N, Katznelson R, Friedman Z. Heart rate/blood pressure response and airway morbidity following tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy, GlideScope and Trachlight: a randomized control trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26(9):740–5. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32832b138d.
    1. Tsai PB, Chen BJ. Hemodynamic Responses To Endotracheal Intubation Comparing The Airway Scope©, Glidescope©, And Macintosh Laryngoscopes. Int J Anesthesiol. 2010;24(2)
    1. Xue FS, Zhang GH, Li XY, Sun HT, Li P, Sun HY, et al. Comparison of haemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with GlideScope videolaryngoscope and fibreoptic bronchoscope. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2006;23(6):522–6. doi: 10.1017/S0265021506000299.
    1. Mahjoubifar M, Borjian Boroojeny S. Hemodynamic Changes during Orotracheal Intubation with the Glidescope and Direct Laryngoscope. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2010;12(4):406–8.
    1. Eberhart LH, Arndt C, Cierpka T, Schwanekamp J, Wulf H, Putzke C. The reliability and validity of the upper lip bite test compared with the Mallampati classification to predict difficult laryngoscopy: an external prospective evaluation. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(1):284–94. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000154535.33429.36.
    1. Adachi YU, Satomoto M, Higuchi H, Watanabe K. Fentanyl attenuates the hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation more than the response to laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg. 2002;95(1):233–70.
    1. Sun DA, Warriner CB, Parsons DG, Klein R, Umedaly HS, Moult M. The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope: randomized clinical trial in 200 patients. Br J Anaesth. 2005;94(3):381–4. doi: 10.1093/bja/aei041.
    1. Carassiti M, Zanzonico R, Cecchini S, Silvestri S, Cataldo R, Agro FE. Force and pressure distribution using Macintosh and GlideScope laryngoscopes in normal and difficult airways: a manikin study. Br J Anaesth. 2012;108(1):146–51. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer304.
    1. Cooper RM. Use of a new videolaryngoscope (GlideScope) in the management of a difficult airway. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50(6):611–3.
    1. Malik MA, Maharaj CH, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Comparison of Macintosh, Truview EVO2, Glidescope, and Airwayscope laryngoscope use in patients with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth. 2008;101(5):723–30. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen231.
    1. Adachi YU, Takamatsu I, Watanabe K, Uchihashi Y, Higuchi H, Satoh T. Evaluation of the cardiovascular responses to fiberoptic orotracheal intubation with television monitoring: comparison with conventional direct laryngoscopy. J Clin Anesth. 2000;12(7):503–8.
    1. Takahashi S, Mizutani T, Miyabe M, Toyooka H. Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation with laryngoscope versus lightwand intubating device (Trachlight) in adults with normal airway. Anesth Analg. 2002;95(2):480–4.
    1. Hirabayashi Y, Hiruta M, Kawakami T, Inoue S, Fukuda H, Saitoh K, et al. Effects of lightwand (Trachlight) compared with direct laryngoscopy on circulatory responses to tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth. 1998;81(2):253–5.
    1. Malik MA, Subramaniam R, Maharaj CH, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Randomized controlled trial of the Pentax AWS, Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in predicted difficult intubation. Br J Anaesth. 2009;103(5):761–8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aep266.
    1. Shayeghi S, Ghasemi M, Sadeghi A, Razavi SS. Hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with a video laryngoscope in infants: a comparison study. J Res Med Sci. 2007;12(5):251.
    1. Bilehjani E, Fakhari S. Hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy in ischemic heart disease: Macintosh blade versus Glidescope videolaryngoscope. Rawal Med J. 2009;34:151–4.
    1. Lim TJ, Lim Y, Liu EH. Evaluation of ease of intubation with the GlideScope or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in simulated easy and difficult laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia. 2005;60(2):180–3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2004.04038.x.
    1. Turkstra TP, Craen RA, Pelz DM, Gelb AW. Cervical spine motion: a fluoroscopic comparison during intubation with lighted stylet, GlideScope, and Macintosh laryngoscope. Anesth Analg. 2005;101(3):910–5. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000166975.38649.27.
    1. Griesdale DE, Liu D, McKinney J, Choi PT. Glidescope(R) video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2012;59(1):41–52. doi: 10.1007/s12630-011-9620-5.
    1. Bucx MJ, van Geel RT, Scheck PA, Stijnen T. Cardiovascular effects of forces applied during laryngoscopy. The importance of tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia. 1992;47(12):1029–33.
    1. Griesdale DE, Chau A, Isac G, Ayas N, Foster D, Irwin C, et al. Video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in critically ill patients: a pilot randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2012;59(11):1032–9. doi: 10.1007/s12630-012-9775-8.
    1. Hastings RH, Hon ED, Nghiem C, Wahrenbrock EA. Force, torque, and stress relaxation with direct laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg. 1996;82(3):456–61.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa