Comparison of video laryngoscope, video stylet, and flexible videoscope for transoral endotracheal intubation in patients with difficult airways: a randomized, parallel-group study

Background The 2022 ASA guidelines recommend the video laryngoscope, video stylet, and flexible videoscope as airway management tools. This study aims to compare the efficacy of three airway devices in intubating patients with difficult airways. Methods A total of 177 patients were selected and randomized into the following three groups: the video laryngoscope group (Group VL, n = 59), video stylet group (Group VS, n = 59), and flexible videoscope group (Group FV, n = 59). The success rate of the first-pass intubation, time of tracheal intubation, level of glottic exposure, and occurrence of intubation-related adverse events were recorded and analyzed. Results All patients were successfully intubated with three devices. The first-pass intubation success rate was significantly higher in Groups VS and FV than in Group VL (96.61% vs. 93.22% vs. 83.05%, P < 0.01), but it was similar in the first-pass intubation success rate between Groups VS and FV(P > 0.05). The number of patients categorized as Wilson-Cormack-Lehane grade I-II was fewer in Group VL than in Groups VS and FV (77.97% vs. 98.30% vs. 100%, P = 0.0281). The time to tracheal intubation was significantly longer in Group FV(95.20 +/- 4.01) than in Groups VL(44.56 +/- 4.42) and VS(26.88 +/- 4.51) (P < 0.01). No significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of adverse intubation reactions (P > 0.05). Conclusions In patients with difficult airways requiring intubation, use of the video stylet has the advantage of a relatively shorter intubation time, and the flexible videoscope and video stylet yield a higher first-pass intubation success rate and clearer glottic exposure than the use of the video laryngoscope.