Visual rigid laryngoscopy versus video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
17
03
2024
accepted:
08
08
2024
medline:
22
10
2024
pubmed:
22
10
2024
entrez:
22
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To assess the efficacy and safety of visual rigid laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy and to provide clinical information for developing a more suitable intubation tool for elderly patients. In 75 consecutive elderly patients undergoing elective surgery in a single institution, tracheal intubation was randomly performed by 2 experienced anaesthesiologists using visual rigid laryngoscopy (Group I, n = 38) or video laryngoscopy (Group II, n = 37). The primary outcome was intubation time. Secondary outcomes were the first-attempt success rate of tracheal intubation, haemodynamic responses at 1, 3, and 5 min after intubation and the incidence of postoperative airway complications, including immediate complications and postoperative complaints. The intubation times were 35.0 (30.0-41.5) s and 42.5 (38.0-51.3) s in Groups I and II, respectively (P < 0.001). The difference in direct complications between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05). In contrast, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the follow-up of the main complaint 30 min and 24 h after tracheal extubation (P > 0.05). There was no difference in the intubation success rate between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The haemodynamic responses at 1, 3, and 5 min after intubation were not significantly different (P > 0.05). Compared with that of video laryngoscopy, the intubation time of visual rigid laryngoscopy in elderly patients was shorter. At the same time, visual rigid laryngoscopy reduced the incidence of immediate complications. However, during endotracheal intubation, there was no significant difference in haemodynamics between the two groups. ChiCTR2100054174.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39436897
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309516
pii: PONE-D-24-00914
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0309516Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2024 Weng et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
NO authors have competing interests.