Sanyar Video Laryngoscope Improved Time and First Pass Success of Tracheal Intubation in Intensive Care Unit in Compared to Direct Laryngoscopy
Abstract
Background: Airway management and tracheal intubation in the ICU is a difficult procedure that may be concomitant with major complications. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the SANYAR ® video laryngoscope(S-VL) on laryngeal view and first Pass Success of tracheal Intubation compared with direct laryngoscopy.
Methods: This comparative, prospective clinical study was conducted on 120 adult patients in a single-center, in a surgical ICU under the supervision of an anesthesiologist in a university hospital. Difficult airway predictors, glottic view, first Pass Success of tracheal Intubation and time of intubation were evaluated with Macintosh laryngoscopy (ML) or the SANYAR® Video Laryngoscope(S-VL).
Results: Tracheal intubation was performed in 58 critically ill patients using ML and 62 patients using S-VL. According to Cormack and Lehane (C&L) grading glottic visualization was more difficult using ML (41%, C&L grade 3 and 4) compared with S-VL (13%, C&L grade 3 and 4) p<0.001. Intubation of trachea was more successful in the first attempt, in patients with at least one difficult airway predictor with a S-VL compared to ML (87% vs. 38%; P = 0.001), time of intubation was also shorter by using S-VL.
Conclusion: Among critically ill patients in the intensive care unit, who require intubation, the SANYAR video laryngoscopy improved glottis view compared to the Macintosh direct laryngoscopy and first-pass orotracheal intubation rate especially in patients with potentially difficult airways.
[2] Cavus E, Kieckhaefer J, Doerges V, Moeller T, Thee C, Wagner K. The C-MAC videolaryngoscope: first experiences with a new device for videolaryngoscopy-guided intubation. Anesth Analg. 2010; 110(2): 473-7.
[3] 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(3): R103.
[4] Jaber S, De Jong A, Pelosi P, Cabrini L, Reignier J, Lascarrou JB. Videolaryngoscopy in critically ill patients. Crit Care. 2019; 23(1):1-7.
[5] Jaber S, Amraoui J, Lefrant JY, Arich C, Cohendy R, Landreau L, et al. Clinical practice and risk factors for immediate complications of endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit: a prospective, multiple-center study. Crit Care Med. 2006; 34:2355-2361
[6] Simpson GD, Ross MJ, McKeown DW, Ray DC. Tracheal intubation in the critically ill: A multi-centre national study of practice and complications. Br J Anaesth. 2012; 108:792–9
[7] Mort TC. Complications of emergency tracheal intubation: Immediate airway-related consequences: Part II. J Intensive Care Med. 2007; 22:208–15
[8] Martin LD, Mhyre JM, Shanks AM, Tremper KK, Kheterpal S. 3,423 emergency tracheal intubations at a university hospital: airway outcomes and complications. Anesthesiology. 2011; 114(1):42-8.
[9] Wilcox SR, Bittner EA, Elmer J, Seigel TA, Nguyen NT, Dhillon A, et al. Neuromuscular blocking agent administration for emergent tracheal intubation is associated with decreased prevalence of procedure-related complications. Crit Care Med. 2012; 40:1808–13
[10] Lascarrou JB, Boisrame-Helms J, Bailly A, Le Thuaut A, Kamel T, Mercier E, et al. Clinical Research in Intensive Care and Sepsis (CRICS) Group: Video laryngoscopy vs direct laryngoscopy on successful first-pass orotracheal intubation among intensive care unit patients: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017; 317:483–93
[11] Griesdale DE, Chau A, Isac G, Ayas N, Foster D, Irwin C, et al. Video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in critically ill patients: A pilot randomized trial. Can J Anaesth. 2012; 59:1032–9
[12] De Jong A, Molinari N, Conseil M, Coisel Y, Pouzeratte Y, Belafia F, et al. Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for orotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2014; 40:629–39
[13] Pieters BMA, Maas EHA, Knape JTA, van Zundert AAJ. Videolaryngoscopy vs. direct laryngoscopy use by experienced anaesthetists in patients with known difficult airways: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2017; 72(12):1532-1541.
[14] Huang HB, Peng JM, Xu B, Liu GY, Du B. Video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults: A systemic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2017; 152:510–7
[15] Khajavi MR, Mohammadyousefi R, Neishaboury M, Moharari RS, Etezadi F, Pourfakhr P. Early clinical experience with a new video laryngoscope (SANYAR®) for tracheal intubation in adults: a comparison clinical study. Front Emerg Med. 2022; 6(3):e35.
Files | ||
Issue | Vol 9 No 3 (2023): Summer | |
Section | Research Article(s) | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/aacc.v9i3.13111 | |
Keywords | ||
Video laryngoscope Intensive care unit Glottic view Tracheal intubation Difficult intubation |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |