Glidescope® Video-laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal Can J Anaesth

Specialty Anesthesiology

Date 2011 Nov 2

PMID 22042705

Citations 98

Authors

Donald E G Griesdale

David Liu

James McKinney

Peter T Choi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: The Glidescope(®) video-laryngoscopy appears to provide better glottic visualization than direct laryngoscopy. However, it remains unclear if it translates into increased success with intubation.

Methods: We systematically searched electronic databases, conference abstracts, and article references. We included trials in humans comparing Glidescope(®) video-laryngoscopy to direct laryngoscopy regarding the glottic view, successful first-attempt intubation, and time to intubation. We generated pooled risk ratios or weighted mean differences across studies. Meta-regression was used to explore heterogeneity based on operator expertise and intubation difficulty.

Results: We included 17 trials with a total of 1,998 patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) of grade 1 laryngoscopy (vs ≥ grade 2) for the Glidescope(®) was 2.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 2.5]. Significant heterogeneity was partially explained by intubation difficulty using meta-regression analysis (P = 0.003). The pooled RR for nondifficult intubations of grade 1 laryngoscopy (vs ≥ grade 2) was 1.5 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.9), and for difficult intubations it was 3.5 (95% CI 2.3 to 5.5). There was no difference between the Glidescope(®) and the direct laryngoscope regarding successful first-attempt intubation or time to intubation, although there was significant heterogeneity in both of these outcomes. In the two studies examining nonexperts, successful first-attempt intubation (RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.4) and time to intubation (weighted mean difference -43 sec, 95% CI -72 to -14 sec) were improved using the Glidescope(®). These benefits were not seen with experts.

Conclusion: Compared to direct laryngoscopy, Glidescope(®) video-laryngoscopy is associated with improved glottic visualization, particularly in patients with potential or simulated difficult airways.

Citing Articles

Comparative study of the McGrath™ videolaryngoscope blades and conventional laryngoscopy efficacy during mechanical chest compressions: Insights from a randomized trial with 90 anesthesiologists on objective and subjective parameters.

Golditz T, Schmidt J, Birkholz T, Danzl A, Moritz A, Ackermann A PLoS One. 2024; 19(9):e0310796.

PMID: 39302951 PMC: 11414979. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310796.

The Clinical Usability Evaluation of an Attachable Video Laryngoscope in the Simulated Tracheal Intubation Scenario: A Manikin Study.

Lee W, Lee H, Kim S, Lee K Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(6).

PMID: 38927806 PMC: 11200530. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11060570.

Comparison of Macintosh Laryngoscope, King Vision, VividTrac, AirAngel Blade, and a Custom-Made 3D-Printed Video Laryngoscope for Difficult and Normal Airways in Mannequins by Novices-A Non-Inferiority Trial.

Bacher V, Nemeth M, Rendeki S, Tornai B, Rozanovic M, Pankaczi A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(11).

PMID: 38892925 PMC: 11173105. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113213.

Comparative Evaluation of Direct Laryngoscopy Versus GlideScope for the Purpose of Laryngoscopy Management and Intubation in Candidates of Cesarean Delivery with General Anesthesia.

Honarmand A, Ebrahim Babaei M, Jafari M, Safavi M Adv Biomed Res. 2024; 13:13.

PMID: 38525393 PMC: 10958721. DOI: 10.4103/abr.abr_308_21.

Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in achieving successful emergency endotracheal intubations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Alsabri M, Abdelwahab O, Elsnhory A, Diab R, Sabesan V, Ayyan M Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):85.

PMID: 38475918 PMC: 10935931. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-024-02500-9.

References

DerSimonian R, Laird N . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(3):177-88. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2. View

Reade M, Delaney A, Bailey M, Angus D . Bench-to-bedside review: avoiding pitfalls in critical care meta-analysis--funnel plots, risk estimates, types of heterogeneity, baseline risk and the ecologic fallacy. Crit Care. 2008; 12(4):220. PMC: 2575558. DOI: 10.1186/cc6941. View

Jaber S, Amraoui J, Lefrant J, Arich C, Cohendy R, Landreau L . 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(9):2355-61. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000233879.58720.87. View

Aziz M, Healy D, Kheterpal S, Fu R, Dillman D, Brambrink A . Routine clinical practice effectiveness of the Glidescope in difficult airway management: an analysis of 2,004 Glidescope intubations, complications, and failures from two institutions. Anesthesiology. 2010; 114(1):34-41. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182023eb7. View

Sun D, Warriner C, Parsons D, Klein R, Umedaly H, Moult M . The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope: randomized clinical trial in 200 patients. Br J Anaesth. 2004; 94(3):381-4. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aei041. View

Teoh W, Shah M, Sia A . Randomised comparison of Pentax AirwayScope and Glidescope for tracheal intubation in patients with normal airway anatomy. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(10):1125-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06032.x. View

Turkstra T, Craen R, Pelz D, Gelb A . Cervical spine motion: a fluoroscopic comparison during intubation with lighted stylet, GlideScope, and Macintosh laryngoscope. Anesth Analg. 2005; 101(3):910-915. DOI: 10.1213/01.ane.0000166975.38649.27. View

Graham C, Beard D, Henry J, McKeown D . Rapid sequence intubation of trauma patients in Scotland. J Trauma. 2004; 56(5):1123-6. DOI: 10.1097/01.ta.0000109066.62811.8a. View

Ioannidis J, Trikalinos T . The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey. CMAJ. 2007; 176(8):1091-6. PMC: 1839799. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.060410. View

10.

Benedetto W, Hess D, Gettings E, Bigatello L, Toon H, Hurford W . Urgent tracheal intubation in general hospital units: an observational study. J Clin Anesth. 2007; 19(1):20-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2006.05.018. View

11.

Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009; 339:b2700. PMC: 2714672. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2700. View

12.

Crosby E, Cooper R, Douglas M, Doyle D, Hung O, Labrecque P . The unanticipated difficult airway with recommendations for management. Can J Anaesth. 1998; 45(8):757-76. DOI: 10.1007/BF03012147. View

13.

ROSE D, COHEN M . The incidence of airway problems depends on the definition used. Can J Anaesth. 1996; 43(1):30-4. DOI: 10.1007/BF03015954. View

14.

Serocki G, Bein B, Scholz J, Dorges V . Management of the predicted difficult airway: a comparison of conventional blade laryngoscopy with video-assisted blade laryngoscopy and the GlideScope. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009; 27(1):24-30. DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32832d328d. View

15.

Malik M, Subramaniam R, Maharaj C, Harte B, Laffey J . Randomized controlled trial of the Pentax AWS, Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in predicted difficult intubation. Br J Anaesth. 2009; 103(5):761-8. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aep266. View

16.

McCarthy R, Tuman K, Tanck E, Ivankovich A . Preoperative airway assessment: predictive value of a multivariate risk index. Anesth Analg. 1996; 82(6):1197-204. DOI: 10.1097/00000539-199606000-00017. View

17.

Griesdale D, Bosma T, Kurth T, Isac G, Chittock D . Complications of endotracheal intubation in the critically ill. Intensive Care Med. 2008; 34(10):1835-42. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-008-1205-6. View

18.

ROSE D, COHEN M . The airway: problems and predictions in 18,500 patients. Can J Anaesth. 1994; 41(5 Pt 1):372-83. DOI: 10.1007/BF03009858. View

19.

Hirsch-Allen A, Ayas N, Mountain S, Dodek P, Peets A, Griesdale D . Influence of residency training on multiple attempts at endotracheal intubation. Can J Anaesth. 2010; 57(9):823-9. DOI: 10.1007/s12630-010-9345-x. View

20.

Malik M, Maharaj C, Harte B, Laffey J . Comparison of Macintosh, Truview EVO2, Glidescope, and Airwayscope laryngoscope use in patients with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth. 2008; 101(5):723-30. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aen231. View