Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in achieving successful emergency endotracheal intubations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Alsabri, Mohammed; Abdelwahab, Omar Ahmed; Elsnhory, Ahmed Bostamy; Diab, Rehab Adel; Sabesan, Vaishnavi; Ayyan, Muhammad; McClean, Christopher; Alhadheri, Ayman.
  • Alsabri M; Department of Emergency Medicine, Al-Thawra Modern General Teaching Hospital, Sana'a City, Yemen. Alsabri5000@gmail.com.
  • Abdelwahab OA; Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. omar3240109@gmail.com.
  • Elsnhory AB; Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
  • Diab RA; Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
  • Sabesan V; Government Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, India.
  • Ayyan M; King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan.
  • McClean C; Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, USA.
  • Alhadheri A; Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine, East Lansing, USA.
Syst Rev ; 13(1): 85, 2024 Mar 12.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38475918
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Intubating a patient in an emergent setting presents significant challenges compared to planned intubation in an operating room. This study aims to compare video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in achieving successful endotracheal intubation on the first attempt in emergency intubations, irrespective of the clinical setting.

METHODS:

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until 27 February 2023. We included only randomized controlled trials that included patients who had undergone emergent endotracheal intubation for any indication, regardless of the clinical setting. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool 2 (ROB2) to assess the included studies. We used the mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR), with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), to pool the continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively.

RESULTS:

Fourteen studies were included with a total of 2470 patients. The overall analysis favored video laryngoscopy over direct laryngoscopy in first-attempt success rate (RR = 1.09, 95% CI [1.02, 1.18], P = 0.02), first-attempt intubation time (MD = - 6.92, 95% CI [- 12.86, - 0.99], P = 0.02), intubation difficulty score (MD = - 0.62, 95% CI [- 0.86, - 0.37], P < 0.001), peri-intubation percentage of glottis opening (MD = 24.91, 95% CI [11.18, 38.64], P < 0.001), upper airway injuries (RR = 0.15, 95% CI [0.04, 0.56], P = 0.005), and esophageal intubation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI [0.15, 0.94], P = 0.04). However, no difference between the two groups was found regarding the overall intubation success rate (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

In emergency intubations, video laryngoscopy is preferred to direct laryngoscopy in achieving successful intubation on the first attempt and was associated with a lower incidence of complications.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Intubación Intratraqueal / Laringoscopía Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto / Intubación Intratraqueal / Laringoscopía Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article