Cervical Spine Motion During Tracheal Intubation Using an Optiscope Versus the McGrath Videolaryngoscope in Patients With Simulated Cervical Immobilization: A Prospective Randomized Crossover Study

被引:14
|
作者
Nam, Karam [1 ]
Lee, Younsuk [2 ]
Park, Hee-Pyoung [1 ]
Chung, Jaeyeon [1 ]
Yoon, Hyun-Kyu [1 ]
Kim, Tae Kyong [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Coll Med, Seoul Natl Univ Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Pain Med, 101 Daehak Ro, Seoul 03080, South Korea
[2] Dongguk Univ, Coll Med, Ilsan Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Pain Med,Med Ctr, Goyang, South Korea
关键词
IN-LINE STABILIZATION; GLOBAL LIGAMENTOUS INSTABILITY; 4 AIRWAY DEVICES; DIRECT LARYNGOSCOPY; MACINTOSH LARYNGOSCOPE; LIGHTWAND INTUBATION; SERIES; MANAGEMENT; FIBERSCOPE; GUIDELINES;
D O I
10.1213/ANE.0000000000003635
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: In patients with an unstable cervical spine, maintenance of cervical immobilization during tracheal intubation is important. In McGrath videolaryngoscopic intubation, lifting of the blade to raise the epiglottis is needed to visualize the glottis, but in patients with an unstable cervical spine, this can cause cervical spine movement. By contrast, the Optiscope, a rigid video-stylet, does not require raising of the epiglottis during tracheal intubation. We therefore hypothesized that the Optiscope would produce less cervical spine movement than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation. The aim of this study was to compare the Optiscope with the McGrath videolaryngoscope with respect to cervical spine motion during intubation in patients with simulated cervical immobilization. METHODS: The primary outcome of the study was the extent of cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1, C1-C2, and C2-C5 segments. In this randomized crossover study, the cervical spine angle was measured before and during tracheal intubation using either the Optiscope or the McGrath videolaryngoscope in 21 patients with simulated cervical immobilization. Cervical spine motion was defined as the change in angle at each cervical segment during tracheal intubation. RESULTS: There was significantly less cervical spine motion at the occiput-C1 segment using the Optiscope rather than the McGrath videolaryngoscope (mean [98.33% CI]: 4.7 degrees [2.4-7.0] vs 10.4 degrees [8.1-12.7]; mean difference [98.33% CI]: -5.7 degrees [-7.5 to -3.9]). There were also fewer cervical spinal motions at the C1-C2 and C2-C5 segments using the Optiscope (mean difference versus the McGrath videolaryngoscope [98.33% CI]: -2.4 degrees [-3.7 to -1.2]) and -3.7 degrees [-5.9 to -1.4], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The Optiscope produces less cervical spine motion than the McGrath videolaryngoscope during tracheal intubation of patients with simulated cervical immobilization.
引用
收藏
页码:1666 / 1672
页数:7
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [21] Cervical spine motion during videolaryngoscopic intubation using a Macintosh-style blade with and without the anterior piece of a cervical collar: a randomized controlled trial
    Jo, Woo-Young
    Choi, Jae-Hyun
    Kim, Jay
    Shin, Kyung
    Choi, Seungeun
    Park, Hee-Pyoung
    Oh, Hyongmin
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA-JOURNAL CANADIEN D ANESTHESIE, 2025, 72 (01): : 142 - 151
  • [22] Comparison of haemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation using Macintosh and Airtraq (R) laryngoscope in patients with simulated cervical spine injury
    Mathew, Nithin
    Gaude, Yogesh Kanta
    Joseph, Tim Thomas
    Kini, K. Gurudas
    SRI LANKAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 26 (02): : 124 - 130
  • [23] A Comparison Between the Conventional and the Laryngoscope-Assisted Lightwand Intubation Techniques in Patients With Cervical Immobilization: A Prospective Randomized Study
    Kim, Eugene
    Kim, Byung-Gun
    Lim, Young-Jin
    Jeon, Young-Tae
    Hwang, Jung-Won
    Lee, Seo-Yun
    Park, Hee-Pyoung
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2017, 125 (03) : 854 - 859
  • [24] Comparing the first-attempt tracheal intubation success of the hyperangulated McGrath® X-blade vs the Macintosh-type CMAC videolaryngoscope in patients with cervical immobilization: a two-centre randomized controlled trial
    Zhang, Jinbin
    Tan, Leng Zoo
    Toh, Han
    Foo, Chek Wun
    Wijeratne, Sujani
    Hu, Hilda
    Seet, Edwin
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 2022, 36 (04) : 1139 - 1145
  • [25] Comparison of the C-MAC®, Airtraq®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilization
    McElwain, J.
    Laffey, J. G.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2011, 107 (02) : 258 - 264
  • [26] A Comparative Study of Orotracheal Intubation Guided by Airtraq and McCoy Laryngoscope in Patients with Rigid Cervical Collar In-situ Simulating Cervical Immobilization for Traumatic Cervical Spine Injury
    Diwan, Akhil
    Purohit, Shobha
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2019, 8 (03) : 161 - 167
  • [27] Cervical spine immobilization does not interfere with nasotracheal intubation performed using GlideScope videolaryngoscopy: a randomized equivalence trial
    Kuo, Yi-Min
    Lai, Hsien-Yung
    Tan, Elise Chia-Hui
    Li, Yi-Shiuan
    Chiang, Ting-Yun
    Huang, Shiang-Suo
    Huang, Wen-Cheng
    Chu, Ya-Chun
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01):
  • [28] Comparison of C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope and McCoy laryngoscope efficacy for nasotracheal intubation in simulated cervical spinal injury: a prospective randomized comparative study
    Seo, Kwon Hui
    Kim, Kyung Mi
    John, Hyunji
    Jun, Joo Hyun
    Han, Minsoo
    Kim, Soyoun
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2020, 20 (01)
  • [29] Ramped versus sniffing position in the videolaryngoscopy-guided tracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients: a prospective randomized study
    Lee, Seongheon
    Jang, Eun-A
    Hong, Minjae
    Bae, Hong-Beom
    Kim, Joungmin
    KOREAN JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2023, 76 (01) : 47 - 55
  • [30] A comparative study of the C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope and McCoy laryngoscope for oro-tracheal intubation with manual in-line stabilization of neck in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery
    Kumari, Astha
    Choudhuri, Pratiti
    Agrawal, Nidhi
    JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2023, 39 (03) : 435 - 443