Comparison of Miller laryngoscope and UEScope videolaryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in four pediatric airway scenarios: a randomized, crossover simulation trial.


Journal

European journal of pediatrics
ISSN: 1432-1076
Titre abrégé: Eur J Pediatr
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7603873

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Historique:
received: 13 07 2018
accepted: 26 03 2019
revised: 21 03 2019
pubmed: 13 4 2019
medline: 25 12 2019
entrez: 13 4 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

With different videolaryngoscopes for pediatric patients available, UEScope can be used in all age groups. The aim of this study was to compare the Miller laryngoscope and UEScope in pediatric intubation by paramedics in different scenarios. Overall, 93 paramedics with no experience in pediatric intubation or videolaryngoscopy performed endotracheal intubation in scenarios: (A) normal airway without chest compressions, (B) difficult airway without chest compressions, (C) normal airway with uninterrupted chest compressions, (D) difficult airway with uninterrupted chest compressions. Scenario A. Total intubation success with both laryngoscopes: 100%. First-attempt success: 100% for UEScope, 96.8% for Miller. Median intubation time for UEScope: 13 s [IQR, 12.5-17], statistically significantly lower than for Miller: 14 s [IQR, 12-19.5] (p = 0.044). Scenario B. Total efficacy: 81.7% for Miller, 100% for UEScope (p = 0.012). First-attempt success: 48.4% for Miller, 87.1% for UEScope (p = 0.001). Median intubation time: 27 s [IQR, 21-33] with Miller, 15 s [IQR, 14-21] with UEScope (p = 0.001). Scenario C. Total efficiency: 91.4% with Miller, 100% with UEScope (p = 0.018); first-attempt success: 67.7 vs. 90.3% (p = 0.003), respectively. Intubation time: 21 s [IQR, 18-28] for Miller, 15 s [IQR, 12-19.5] for UEScope. Scenario D. Total efficiency: 65.6% with Miller, 98.9% with UEScope (p < 0.001); first-attempt success: 29.1 vs. 72% (p = 0.001), respectively. Intubation time: 38 s [IQR, 23-46] for Miller, 21 s [IQR, 17-25.5] for UEScope.Conclusion: In pediatric normal airway without chest compressions, UEScope is comparable with Miller. In difficult pediatric airways without chest compressions, UEScope offers better first-attempt success, shorted median intubation time, and improved glottic visualization. With uninterrupted chest compressions in normal or difficult airway, UEScope provides a higher first-attempt success, a shorter median intubation time, and a better glottic visualization than Miller laryngoscope. What is Known: • Endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for adult and children airway management. • More than two direct laryngoscopy attempts in children with difficult airways are associated with a high failure rate and increased incidence of severe complications. What is New: • In difficult pediatric airways with or without chest compressions, UEScope in inexperienced providers in simulated settings provides better first-attempt efficiency, median intubation time, and glottic visualization.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30976922
doi: 10.1007/s00431-019-03375-y
pii: 10.1007/s00431-019-03375-y
pmc: PMC6511341
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

937-945

Références

Anesth Analg. 1999 Jul;89(1):259-60
pubmed: 10389822
BMJ. 2010 Mar 23;340:c332
pubmed: 20332509
Paediatr Anaesth. 2012 Oct;22(10):1008-15
pubmed: 22967160
Ann Emerg Med. 2013 Mar;61(3):271-7
pubmed: 23083969
Emerg Med Int. 2013;2013:407547
pubmed: 24288617
Paediatr Anaesth. 2014 Oct;24(10):1056-65
pubmed: 24958249
Eur J Pediatr. 2015 Jul;174(7):981-2
pubmed: 25637555
Eur J Pediatr. 2015 Oct;174(10):1325-32
pubmed: 25894914
Pediatrics. 2015 Nov;136(5):912-9
pubmed: 26482669
Resuscitation. 2016 Feb;99:38-43
pubmed: 26703462
Lancet Respir Med. 2016 Jan;4(1):37-48
pubmed: 26705976
Acad Emerg Med. 2016 Aug;23(8):870-7
pubmed: 27208690
Am J Emerg Med. 2017 May;35(5):789-790
pubmed: 27916466
Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Apr;35(4):574-575
pubmed: 27986336
Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Mar;35(3):518-519
pubmed: 28089239
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2017 Apr;18(4):310-318
pubmed: 28198754
Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Aug;35(8):1142-1146
pubmed: 28341185
Br J Anaesth. 2017 Jun 1;118(6):932-937
pubmed: 28549081
Chin Med J (Engl). 2017 Aug 5;130(15):1867-1875
pubmed: 28748861
Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2017;49(4):274-282
pubmed: 28953308
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018 Oct;37(5):459-466
pubmed: 29331616
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2018 Mar;19(3):e136-e144
pubmed: 29504951
J Pediatr. 2018 Oct;201:281-284.e1
pubmed: 29980290

Auteurs

Jacek Smereka (J)

Department of Emergency Medical Service, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.

Marcin Madziala (M)

Lazarski University, 43 Swieradowska Str., 02-662, Warsaw, Poland.

Dominika Dunder (D)

Lazarski University, 43 Swieradowska Str., 02-662, Warsaw, Poland.

Elzbieta Makomaska-Szaroszyk (E)

Lazarski University, 43 Swieradowska Str., 02-662, Warsaw, Poland.

Lukasz Szarpak (L)

Lazarski University, 43 Swieradowska Str., 02-662, Warsaw, Poland. lukasz.szarpak@gmail.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH