Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial

YILDIRIM GUCLU, CIGDEM; Baytaş, Volkan; Can, ozlem selvi; Hajiyeva, Konul

doi:10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455

Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial

Konul HAJİYEVA, (Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Memorial Hospital, Ankara-Turkey)

Özlem Selvi CAN, (Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara-Turkey)

Volkan BAYTAŞ, (Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara-Turkey)

Çiğdem Yıldırım GÜÇLÜ (Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara-Turkey)

Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi

1 0

Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 27 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 421 - 426 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455 İndeks Tarihi: 18-05-2022

Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial

Öz:

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is a key skill for clinicians and may be challenging in some patients due to various reasons. Nowadays, various kinds of videolaryngoscopes are available and usually used as a rescue device when direct laryngoscopy failed. Pediatric airway has some differences when compared with adults and may be challenging. This study aims to compare and evaluate C Mac D-Blade and commonly used Macintosh laryngoscope in pediatric patients. METHODS: In this study, 56 pediatric patients, 5–10 years old (10–40 kgs) who had undergone elective surgery and need endotracheal intubation were included after obtaining ethical board approval and informed consent from parents. The patients were randomized into two equal groups for laryngoscopy and intubation by either with Macintosh laryngoscope or C Mac D-Blade videolaryngoscope. Glottic view, number of attempts, intubation time, any complications and hemodynamic variables were recorded. A value of p<0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In pediatric patients with unanticipated difficult airway, the mean intubation time was significantly shorter with C Mac D-Blade (21±9 and 41±7 seconds, respectively (p<0.001). The results of the two groups were similar concerning the remaining parameters. CONCLUSION: C Mac D-Blade videolaryngoscope shortened intubation time about twice when compared to Macintosh blade C Mac D-Blade videolaryngoscope, Videolaryngoscopes may be a good alternative for routine intubation, education and a rescue device for difficult intubation.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Heinrich S, Birkholz T, Ihmsen H, Irouschek A, Ackermann A, Schmidt J. Incidence and predictors of difficult laryngoscopy in 11,219 pediatric anesthesia procedures. Paediatr Anaesth 2012;22:729–36.
2. Harless J, Ramaiah R, Bhananker SM. Pediatric airway management. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci 2014;4:65–70.
3. Sims C, von Ungern-Sternberg BS. The normal and the challenging pediatric airway. Paediatr Anaesth 2012;22:521–6.
4. Miller KA, Nagler J. Advances in emergent airway management in pediatrics. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2019;37:473–91.
5. Streiff A, Chimhundu-Sithole T, Evans F. Approach to the paediatric difficult airway in a high- versus low resource setting: a comparison of algorithms and difficult-airway trolleys. Available from: https://www.wfsahq. org/components/com_virtual_library/media/a94bcba16b857632fd9cad75afd150d8-atow-399-00.pdf. Accessed Feb 5, 2020.
6. Valois-Gómez T, Oofuvong M, Auer G, Coffin D, Loetwiriyakul W, Correa JA. Incidence of difficult bag-mask ventilation in children: a prospective observational study. Paediatr Anaesth 2013;23:920–6.
7. Karsli C, Pehora C, Al-Izzi A, Mathew P. A retrospective review of pediatric difficult airways: once easy, not always easy. Can J Anaesth 2016;63:776–7.
8. Park R, Peyton JM, Fiadjoe JE, Hunyady AI, Kimball T, Zurakowski D, et al; PeDI Collaborative Investigators; PeDI collaborative investigators. The efficacy of GlideScope® videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy in children who are difficult to intubate: an analysis from the paediatric difficult intubation registry. Br J Anaesth 2017;119:984–92.
9. Caplan RA, Posner KL, Ward RJ, Cheney FW. Adverse respiratory events in anesthesia: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 1990;72:828–33.
10. Crosby ET, Cooper RM, Douglas MJ, Doyle DJ, Hung OR, Labrecque P, et al. The unanticipated difficult airway with recommendations for management. Can J Anaesth 1998;45:757–76.
11. Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al; American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 2013;118:251–70.
12. Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Mendonca C, Bhagrath R, Patel A, et al; Difficult Airway Society intubation guidelines working group. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth 2015;115:827–48.
13. Cook TM, MacDougall-Davis SR. Complications and failure of airway management. Br J Anaesth 2012;109:i68–85.
14. Noppens RR, Geimer S, Eisel N, David M, Piepho T. Endotracheal intubation using the C-MAC® video laryngoscope or the Macintosh laryngoscope: a prospective, comparative study in the ICU. Crit Care 2012;16:R103.
15. Aydın A, Bilge S, Aydın C, Bilge M, Çevik E, Eryılmaz M. The success of endotracheal intubation with a modified laryngoscope using night vision goggles. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2018;24:97–103.
16. Kelly FE, Cook TM. Seeing is believing: getting the best out of videolaryngoscopy. Br J Anaesth 2016;117:i9–13.
17. Fiadjoe JE, Kovatsis P. Videolaryngoscopes in pediatric anesthesia: what’s new?. Minerva Anestesiol 2014;80:76–82.
18. Nair S, Thomas EJ, Katakam L. Video laryngoscopy vs. Direct laryngoscopy in teaching neonatal endotracheal intubation: a simulation-based study. Cureus 2017;9:e962.
19. Ruetzler K, Imach S, Weiss M, Haas T, Schmidt AR. Comparison of five video laryngoscopes and conventional direct laryngoscopy : Investigations on simple and simulated difficult airways on the intubation trainer. [Article in German]. Anaesthesist 2015;64:513–9.
20. Madziala M, Smereka J, Dabrowski M, Leung S, Ruetzler K, Szarpak L. A comparison of McGrath MAC® and standard direct laryngoscopy in simulated immobilized cervical spine pediatric intubation: a manikin study. Eur J Pediatr 2017;176:779–86.
21. Macnair D, Baraclough D, Wilson G, Bloch M, Engelhardt T. Pediatric airway management: comparing the Berci-Kaplan Video Laryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19:577–80.
22. Cavus E, Bein B, Dörges V. Airwaymanagement: video-assisted airway management. [Article in German]. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 2011;46:588–96.
23. Andersen LH, Rovsing L, Olsen KS. GlideScope videolaryngoscope vs. Macintosh direct laryngoscope for intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2011;55:1090–7.
24. Howard-Quijano KJ, Huang YM, Matevosian R, Kaplan MB, Steadman RH. Video-assisted instruction improves the success rate for tracheal intubation by novices. Br J Anaesth 2008;101:568–72.
25. Griesdale DE, Liu D, McKinney J, Choi PT. Glidescope® video-laryngos copy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth 2012;59:41–52.
26. Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, Cook TM, Smith AF. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;11:CD011136.
27. Driver BE, Prekker ME, Moore JC, Schick AL, Reardon RF, Miner JR. Direct Versus Video Laryngoscopy Using the C-MAC for Tracheal Intubation in the Emergency Department, a Randomized Controlled Trial. Acad Emerg Med 2016;23:433–9.
28. Özkan D, Altınsoy S, Sayın M, Dolgun H, Ergil J, Dönmez A. Comparison of cervical spine motion during intubation with a C MAC D Blade® and an LMA Fastrach®. Vergleich der zervikalen Wirbelsäulenbewegung unter Intubation mittels C MAC D Blade® und LMA Fastrach®. Anaesthesist 2019;68:90–6.
29. Vlatten A, Aucoin S, Litz S, Macmanus B, Soder C. A comparison of the STORZ video laryngoscope and standard direct laryngoscopy for intubation in the Pediatric airway--a randomized clinical trial. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19:1102–7.
30. Kaplan MB, Hagberg CA, Ward DS, Brambrink A, Chhibber AK, Heidegger T, et al. Comparison of direct and video-assisted views of the larynx during routine intubation. J Clin Anesth 2006;18:357–62.
31. Singh R, Singh P, Vajifdar H. A comparison of Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller blade in neonates and infants. Paediatr Anaesth 2009;19:338–42.
32. Abdelgadir IS, Phillips RS, Singh D, Moncreiff MP, Lumsden JL. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in children (excluding neonates). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;5:CD011413.
33. Holm-Knudsen RJ, Rasmussen LS. Paediatric airway management: basic aspects. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009;53:1−9.
34. Shah SB, Hariharan U, Bhargava AK. C Mac D blade: Clinical tips and tricks. Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care 2016;6:6−10.
35. Kılıçaslan A, Topal A, Erol A, Uzun ST. Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade, Conventional C-MAC, and Macintosh Laryngoscopes in simulated easy and difficult airways. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 2014;42:182−9.
36. Cavus E, Neumann T, Doerges V, Moeller T, Scharf E, Wagner K, et al. First clinical evaluation of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope during routine and difficult intubation. Anesth Analg 2011;112:382−5.
37. Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984;39:1105−11.
38. Jain D, Mehta S, Gandhi K, Arora S, Parikh B, Abas M. Comparison of intubation conditions with CMAC Miller videolaryngoscope and conventional Miller laryngoscope in lateral position in infants: A prospective randomized trial. Paediatr Anaesth 2018;28:226−30.
39. Mulcaster JT, Mills J, Hung OR, MacQuarrie K, Law JA, Pytka S, et al. Laryngoscopic intubation: learning and performance. Anesthesiology 2003;98:23−7.
40. Balaban O, Hakim M, Walia H, Tumin D, Lind M, Tobias JD. A comparison of direct laryngoscopy and videolaryngoscopy for endotracheal ıntubation by ınexperienced users: a pediatric manikin study. Pediatr Emerg Care 2020;36:169−72.
41. Vlatten A, Litz S, MacManus B, Launcelott S, Soder C. A comparison of the GlideScope video laryngoscope and standard direct laryngoscopy in children with immobilized cervical spine. Pediatr Emerg Care 2012;28:1317−20.
42. Serocki G, Neumann T, Scharf E, Dörges V, Cavus E. Indirect videolaryngoscopy with C-MAC D-Blade and GlideScope: a randomized, controlled comparison in patients with suspected difficult airways. Minerva Anestesiol 2013;79:121−9.
43. Sinha R, Ray BR, Sharma A, Pandey RK, Punj J, Darlong V, et al. Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope size 2 Macintosh blade with size 2 C-MAC D-Blade for laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation in children with simulated cervical spine injury: A prospective randomized crossover study. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2019;35:509−14.

APA	Hajiyeva K, Can o, Baytaş V, YILDIRIM GUCLU C (2021). Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. , 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
Chicago	Hajiyeva Konul,Can ozlem selvi,Baytaş Volkan,YILDIRIM GUCLU CIGDEM Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. (2021): 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
MLA	Hajiyeva Konul,Can ozlem selvi,Baytaş Volkan,YILDIRIM GUCLU CIGDEM Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. , 2021, ss.421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
AMA	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. . 2021; 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
Vancouver	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. . 2021; 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
IEEE	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C "Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial." , ss.421 - 426, 2021. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
ISNAD	Hajiyeva, Konul vd. "Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial". (2021), 421-426. https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455

APA	Hajiyeva K, Can o, Baytaş V, YILDIRIM GUCLU C (2021). Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, 27(4), 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
Chicago	Hajiyeva Konul,Can ozlem selvi,Baytaş Volkan,YILDIRIM GUCLU CIGDEM Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi 27, no.4 (2021): 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
MLA	Hajiyeva Konul,Can ozlem selvi,Baytaş Volkan,YILDIRIM GUCLU CIGDEM Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, vol.27, no.4, 2021, ss.421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
AMA	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi. 2021; 27(4): 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
Vancouver	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi. 2021; 27(4): 421 - 426. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
IEEE	Hajiyeva K,Can o,Baytaş V,YILDIRIM GUCLU C "Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial." Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, 27, ss.421 - 426, 2021. 10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455
ISNAD	Hajiyeva, Konul vd. "Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope in pediatric patients: Randomized controlled trial". Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi 27/4 (2021), 421-426. https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2020.58455