Prospective development and validation of a universal classification for paediatric videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation: the PeDiAC score.
airway management
intubation, intratracheal
laryngoscopy
paediatrics
respiratory system
Journal
Anaesthesia
ISSN: 1365-2044
Titre abrégé: Anaesthesia
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370524
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Aug 2024
07 Aug 2024
Historique:
accepted:
14
06
2024
medline:
7
8
2024
pubmed:
7
8
2024
entrez:
7
8
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The VIDIAC score, a prospectively developed universal classification for videolaryngoscopy, has shown excellent diagnostic performance in adults. However, there is no reliable classification system for videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation in children. We aimed to develop and validate a multivariable logistic regression model and easy-to-use score to classify difficult videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation in children and to compare it with the Cormack and Lehane classification. A secondary aim was to externally validate the VIDIAC score in children. We conducted a prospective observational study within a structured universal videolaryngoscopy implementation programme. We used C-MAC™ videolaryngoscopes in all children undergoing tracheal intubation for elective surgical procedures. We validated the VIDIAC score externally and assessed its performance. We then identified eligible co-variables for inclusion in the PeDiAC score, developed a multivariable logistic regression model and compared its performance against the Cormack and Lehane classification. We studied 809 children undergoing 904 episodes of tracheal intubation. The VIDIAC score outperformed the Cormack and Lehane classification when classifying the difficulty of videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95%CI 0.73-0.87) vs. 0.69 (95%CI 0.62-0.76), respectively, p = 0.018. Eight eligible tracheal intubation-related factors, that were selected by 100-times repeated 10-fold cross-validated least absolute shrinkage selector operator regression, were used to develop the PeDiAC model. The PeDiAC model and score showed excellent diagnostic performance and model calibration. The PeDiAC score achieved significantly better diagnostic performance than the Cormack and Lehane classification, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.97 (95%CI 0.96-0.99) vs. 0.69 (95%CI 0.62-0.76), respectively, p < 0.001. We developed and validated a specifically tailored classification for paediatric videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation with excellent diagnostic performance and calibration that outperformed the Cormack and Lehane classification.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The VIDIAC score, a prospectively developed universal classification for videolaryngoscopy, has shown excellent diagnostic performance in adults. However, there is no reliable classification system for videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation in children. We aimed to develop and validate a multivariable logistic regression model and easy-to-use score to classify difficult videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation in children and to compare it with the Cormack and Lehane classification. A secondary aim was to externally validate the VIDIAC score in children.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a prospective observational study within a structured universal videolaryngoscopy implementation programme. We used C-MAC™ videolaryngoscopes in all children undergoing tracheal intubation for elective surgical procedures. We validated the VIDIAC score externally and assessed its performance. We then identified eligible co-variables for inclusion in the PeDiAC score, developed a multivariable logistic regression model and compared its performance against the Cormack and Lehane classification.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We studied 809 children undergoing 904 episodes of tracheal intubation. The VIDIAC score outperformed the Cormack and Lehane classification when classifying the difficulty of videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95%CI 0.73-0.87) vs. 0.69 (95%CI 0.62-0.76), respectively, p = 0.018. Eight eligible tracheal intubation-related factors, that were selected by 100-times repeated 10-fold cross-validated least absolute shrinkage selector operator regression, were used to develop the PeDiAC model. The PeDiAC model and score showed excellent diagnostic performance and model calibration. The PeDiAC score achieved significantly better diagnostic performance than the Cormack and Lehane classification, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.97 (95%CI 0.96-0.99) vs. 0.69 (95%CI 0.62-0.76), respectively, p < 0.001.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We developed and validated a specifically tailored classification for paediatric videolaryngoscopic tracheal intubation with excellent diagnostic performance and calibration that outperformed the Cormack and Lehane classification.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Anaesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Anaesthetists.
Références
Disma N, Virag K, Riva T, et al. Difficult tracheal intubation in neonates and infants. NEonate and children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE): a prospective European multicentre observational study. Br J Anaesth 2021; 126: 1173–1181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.02.021.
Fiadjoe JE, Nishisaki A, Jagannathan N, et al. Airway management complications in children with difficult tracheal intubation from the Pediatric Difficult Intubation (PeDI) registry: a prospective cohort analysis. Lancet Respir Med 2016; 4: 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213‐2600(15)00508‐1.
Habre W, Disma N, Virag K, et al. Incidence of severe critical events in paediatric anaesthesia (APRICOT): a prospective multicentre observational study in 261 hospitals in Europe. Lancet Respir Med 2017; 5: 412–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213‐2600(17)30116‐9.
Garcia‐Marcinkiewicz AG, Kovatsis PG, Hunyady AI, et al. First‐attempt success rate of video laryngoscopy in small infants (VISI): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2020; 396: 1905–1913. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140‐6736(20)32532‐0.
Riva T, Engelhardt T, Basciani R, et al. Direct versus video laryngoscopy with standard blades for neonatal and infant tracheal intubation with supplemental oxygen: a multicentre, non‐inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Child Adolesc Health 2023; 7: 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352‐4642(22)00313‐3.
de Carvalho CC, Regueira S, Souza ABS, et al. Videolaryngoscopes versus direct laryngoscopes in children: ranking systematic review with network meta‐analyses of randomized clinical trials. Paediatr Anaesth 2022; 32: 1000–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/pan.14521.
Peyton J, Park R, Staffa SJ, et al. A comparison of videolaryngoscopy using standard blades or non‐standard blades in children in the Paediatric Difficult Intubation Registry. Br J Anaesth 2021; 126: 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2020.08.010.
Disma N, Asai T, Cools E, et al. Airway management in neonates and infants: European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and British Journal of Anaesthesia joint guidelines. Br J Anaesth 2024; 132: 124–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2023.08.040.
Norris A, Armstrong J. Comparative videolaryngoscope performance in children: data from the Pediatric Difficult Intubation Registry. Br J Anaesth 2021; 126: 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2020.08.031.
Lundstrøm LH, Møller AM, Rosenstock C, Astrup G, Gätke MR, Wetterslev J, the Danish Anaesthesia Database. A documented previous difficult tracheal intubation as a prognostic test for a subsequent difficult tracheal intubation in adults. Anaesthesia 2009; 64: 1081–1088. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2044.2009.06057.x.
Kohse EK, Siebert HK, Sasu PB, et al. A model to predict difficult airway alerts after videolaryngoscopy in adults with anticipated difficult airways – the VIDIAC score. Anaesthesia 2022; 77: 1089–1096. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15841.
Siebert HK, Kohse EK, Petzoldt M. A universal classification for videolaryngoscopy using the VIDIAC score requires real world conditions: a reply. Anaesthesia 2023; 78: 126. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15892.
Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 1105–1111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2044.1984.tb08932.x.
Cook TM. A new practical classification of laryngeal view. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 274–279. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365‐2044.2000.01270.x.
Yentis SM, Lee DJ. Evaluation of an improved scoring system for the grading of direct laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 1041–1044. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365‐2044.1998.00605.x.
Wilson ME, Spiegelhalter D, Robertson JA, Lesser P. Predicting difficult intubation. Br J Anaesth 1988; 61: 211–216. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/61.2.211.
Levitan RM, Ochroch EA, Kush S, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Assessment of airway visualization: validation of the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scale. Acad Emerg Med 1998; 5: 919–923. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553‐2712.1998.tb02823.x.
Angadi SP, Frerk C. Videolaryngoscopy and Cormack and Lehane grading. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 628–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2044.2011.06777.x.
Cormack RS. Cormack–Lehane classification revisited. Br J Anaesth 2010; 105: 867–868. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeq324.
Pearce AC, Duggan LV, El‐Boghdadly K. Making the grade: has Cormack and Lehane grading stood the test of time? Anaesthesia 2021; 76: 705–709. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15446.
Mines R, Ahmad I. Can you compare the views of videolaryngoscopes to the Macintosh laryngoscope? Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 315–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2044.2011.06685.x.
Swann AD, English JD, O'Loughlin EJ. The development and preliminary evaluation of a proposed new scoring system for videolaryngoscopy. Anaesth Intensive Care 2012; 40: 697–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X1204000417.
Sasu PB, Gutsche N, Kramer R, et al. Universal paediatric videolaryngoscopy and glottic view grading: a prospective observational study. Anaesthesia 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.16366.
Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. BMJ 2015; 350: g7594. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7594.
Sasu PB, Pansa JI, Stadlhofer R, et al. Nasendoscopy to predict difficult Videolaryngoscopy: a multivariable model development study. J Clin Med 2023; 12: 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12103433.
Butcher NJ, Monsour A, Mew EJ, et al. Guidelines for reporting outcomes in trial reports: the CONSORT‐outcomes 2022 extension. JAMA 2022; 328: 2252–2264. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.21022.
Obuchowski NA, McClish DK. Sample size determination for diagnostic accuracy studies involving binormal ROC curve indices. Stat Med 1997; 16: 1529–1542. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097‐0258(19970715)16:13<1529::aid‐sim565>3.0.co;2‐h.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011413.pub2.
Petzoldt M, Grun C, Wunsch VA, Bauer M, Hardel TT, Grensemann J. In reply: comparing devices for managing the difficult airway. Can J Anaesth 2024; 71: 156–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630‐023‐02627‐8.
Sajayan A, Nair A, McNarry AF, Mir F, Ahmad I, El‐Boghdadly K. Analysis of a national difficult airway database. Anaesthesia 2022; 77: 1077–1080. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15820.
Wünsch VA, Köhl V, Breitfeld P, et al. Hyperangulated blades or direct epiglottis lifting to optimize glottis exposure in difficult Macintosh videolaryngoscopy: a non‐inferiority analysis of a prospective observational study. Front Med 2023; 10: 1292056. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1292056.
Petzoldt M, Grun C, Wunsch VA, Bauer M, Hardel TT, Grensemann J. Vie scope® versus videolaryngoscopy in expected difficult airways: a randomized controlled trial. Can J Anaesth 2023; 70: 1486–1494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630‐023‐02534‐y.
Rosenblatt WH, Yanez ND. A decision tree approach to airway management pathways in the 2022 difficult airway algorithm of the American society of anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 2022; 134: 910–915. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000005930.
Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw 2010; 33: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v033.i01.
Tay JK, Narasimhan B, Hastie T. Elastic net regularization paths for all generalized linear models. J Stat Softw 2023; 106: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v106.i01.
Carter JV, Pan J, Rai SN, Galandiuk S. ROC‐ing along: evaluation and interpretation of receiver operating characteristic curves. Surgery 2016; 159: 1638–1645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2015.12.029.
DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke‐Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837–845. https://doi.org/10.2307/2531595.
Nattino G, Finazzi S, Bertolini G. A new test and graphical tool to assess the goodness of fit of logistic regression models. Stat Med 2016; 35: 709–720. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6744.
Poole D, Carlisle JB. Mirror, mirror on the wall…predictions in anaesthesia and critical care. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 1104–1109. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.13537.
Van Calster B, McLernon DJ, van Smeden M, Wynants L, Steyerberg EW. Calibration: the Achilles heel of predictive analytics. BMC Med 2019; 17: 230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916‐019‐1466‐7.
Miller KA, Monuteaux MC, Nagler J. Technical factors associated with first‐pass success during endotracheal intubation in children: analysis of videolaryngoscopy recordings. Emerg Med J 2021; 38: 125–131. https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed‐2020‐209700.
Adnet F, Borron SW, Racine SX, Clemessy JL, Fournier JL, Plaisance P, Lapandry C. The intubation difficulty scale (IDS): proposal and evaluation of a new score characterizing the complexity of endotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 1290–1297. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542‐199712000‐00005.
Cook TM, Kelly FE, Boniface N, Seller C. Universal videolaryngoscopy: the importance of choosing the right device. Br J Anaesth 2019; 122: e59–e60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2018.12.014.
de Carvalho CC, da Silva DM, Lemos VM, et al. Videolaryngoscopy vs. direct Macintosh laryngoscopy in tracheal intubation in adults: a ranking systematic review and network meta‐analysis. Anaesthesia 2022; 77: 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15626.
Gu Y, Robert J, Kovacs G, et al. A deliberately restricted laryngeal view with the GlideScope® video laryngoscope is associated with faster and easier tracheal intubation when compared with a full glottic view: a randomized clinical trial. Can J Anaesth 2016; 63: 928–937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630‐016‐0654‐6.
Köhl V, Wünsch VA, Müller MC, et al. Hyperangulated vs. Macintosh videolaryngoscopy in adults with anticipated difficult airway management: a randomised controlled trial. Anaesthesia 2024. Epub ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.16326.