RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is not certain whether the blade geometry of videolaryngoscopes, either a hyperangulated or Macintosh shape, affects glottic view, success rate and/or tracheal intubation time in patients with expected difficult airways. We hypothesised that using a hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blade would visualise a higher percentage of glottic opening compared with a Macintosh videolaryngoscope blade in patients with expected difficult airways. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial in adult patients scheduled to undergo elective ear, nose and throat or oral and maxillofacial surgery, who were anticipated to have a difficult airway. All airway operators were consultant anaesthetists. Patients were allocated randomly to tracheal intubation with either hyperangulated (C-MAC D-BLADE™) or Macintosh videolaryngoscope blades (C-MAC™). The primary outcome was the percentage of glottic opening. First attempt success was designated a key secondary outcome. RESULTS: We assessed 2540 adults scheduled for elective head and neck surgery for eligibility and included 182 patients with expected difficult airways undergoing orotracheal intubation. The percentage of glottic opening visualised, expressed as median (IQR [range]), was 89 (69-99 [0-100])% with hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades and 54 (9-90 [0-100])% with Macintosh videolaryngoscope blades (p < 0.001). First-line hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy failed in one patient and Macintosh videolaryngoscopy in 12 patients (13%, p = 0.002). First attempt success rate was 97% with hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades and 67% with Macintosh videolaryngoscope blades (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Glottic view and first attempt success rate were superior with hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades compared with Macintosh videolaryngoscope blades when used by experienced anaesthetists in patients with difficult airways.
RESUMO
Purpose: It is unknown if direct epiglottis lifting or conversion to hyperangulated videolaryngoscopes, or even direct epiglottis lifting with hyperangulated videolaryngoscopes, may optimize glottis visualization in situations where Macintosh videolaryngoscopy turns out to be more difficult than expected. This study aims to determine if the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) improvement achieved by direct epiglottis lifting is non-inferior to the one accomplished by a conversion to hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy in these situations. Methods: One or more optimization techniques were applied in 129 difficult Macintosh videolaryngoscopy cases in this secondary analysis of a prospective observational study. Stored videos were reviewed by at least three independent observers who assessed the POGO and six glottis view grades. A linear mixed regression and a linear regression model were fitted. Estimated marginal means were used to analyze differences between optimization maneuvers. Results: In this study, 163 optimization maneuvers (77 direct epiglottis lifting, 57 hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy and 29 direct epiglottis lifting with a hyperangulated videolaryngoscope) were applied exclusively or sequentially. Vocal cords were not visible in 91.5% of the cases with Macintosh videolaryngoscopy, 24.7% with direct epiglottis lifting, 36.8% with hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy and 0% with direct lifting with a hyperangulated videolaryngoscope. Conversion to direct epiglottis lifting improved POGO (mean + 49.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 41.4 to 58.0; p < 0.001) and glottis view (mean + 2.2 grades; 95% CI 1.9 to 2.5; p < 0.001). Conversion to hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy improved POGO (mean + 43.7%; 95% CI 34.1 to 53.3; p < 0.001) and glottis view (mean + 1.9 grades; 95% CI 1.6 to 2.2; p < 0.001). The difference in POGO improvement between conversion to direct epiglottis lifting and conversion to hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy is: mean 6.0%; 95% CI -6.5-18.5%; hence non-inferiority was confirmed. Conclusion: When Macintosh videolaryngoscopy turned out to be difficult, glottis exposure with direct epiglottis lifting was non-inferior to the one gathered by conversion to hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy. A combination of both maneuvers yields the best result. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03950934.