The Efficacy of O-Mac®, Patent Video Laryngoscope, and Conventional Laryngoscope for Intubation in the Operating Room
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.6594Keywords:
Airway management, Conventional laryngoscope, O-Mac®, Mc-GRATH™ video laryngoscopeAbstract
BACKGROUND: Management of the airway in patients undergoing surgery is increasingly difficult. The airway management in the operating room in terms of the initial action of anesthesia is very important. Video-laryngoscopy has been shown to provide a better view of the larynx’s structure compared to direct visualization.
AIM: We describe our experience using a custom made and inexpensive tool for a video-laryngoscopy.
METHODS: This is an experimental research with single randomized clinical trial conducted at the Anesthesiology Department of Sanglah General Hospital Denpasar. There were 270 patients divides into three group with conventional, O-Mac® and Mc-GRATH™ BF laryngoscope, aged 18–65 years old, with Mallampati grade 1–2, randomly selected, and signed informed consent.
RESULTS: Intubation time fastest with O-Mac® median 26 (15–36) s, p = 0.000. Laryngoscopy time fastest with O-Mac® median 5.5 (2–13 s), p = 0.000. O-Mac® does not use many tools, p = 0.000. All three did not produce tissue damage with results p = 0.007. Hemodynamic changes p = 0.000.
CONCLUSION: The O-Mac® is superior in terms of laryngoscope time and intubation time compared to the Mc-GRATH™ BF blade and has the same level of safety as the patented Mc-GRATH ™ video laryngoscope, and better than conventional laryngoscopes.Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Aziz MF, Healy D, Kheterpal S, Fu RF, Dillman D, Brambrink AM. 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. 2011;114(1):34e4. https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0b013e3182023eb7 PMid:21150569
Hypes CD, Stolz U, Sakles JC, Joshi RR, Natt B, Malo J, et al. Video laryngoscopy improves odds of first-attempt success at intubation in the intensive care unit. A propensity-matched analysis. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13(3):382-90. https://doi.org/10.1513/annalsats.201508-505oc PMid:26653096
Griesdale DE, Bosma TL, Kurth T, Isac G, Chittock DR. Complications of endotracheal intubation in the critically ill. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34(10):1835-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1205-6 PMid:18604519.
Ono Y, Kakamu T, Kikuchi H, Mori Y, Watanabe Y, Shinohara K. Expert-performed endotracheal intubation-related complications in trauma patients: Incidence, possible risk factors, and outcomes in the prehospital setting and emergency department. Emerg Med Int. 2018;2018:5649476. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5649476 PMid:29984001
Hoshijima H, Kuratani N, Hirabayashi Y, Takeuchi R, Shiga T, Masaki E. Pentax airway scope vs macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anesthesia. 2014;69(8):911-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.12705 PMid:24820205
Cavus E, Byhahn C, Dörges V. Classification of videolaryngoscopes is crucial. Br J Anaesth. 2017;118(5):806-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex112 PMid:28510756
Pieters BM, Maas EH, Knape JT, van Zundert AA. Videolaryngoscopy vs. direct laryngoscopy use by experienced anesthetists in patients with known difficult airways: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2017;72(12):1532-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.14057 PMid:28940354
Uribe VF, Ríos DA, Jiménez LC, Pulecio JD, Reina AF, Salgado JC, et al. Borescope vs laryngoscope in difficult airway management by non-expert personnel: A non-randomized pilot study in a simulated environment. Int J Clin Anesthesiol. 2019;7(1):1099.
Karippacheril JG, Umesh G, Ramkumar V. Inexpensive video-laryngoscopy guided intubation using a personal computer: Initial experience of a novel technique. J Clin Monit Comput. 2014;28(3):261-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-013-9522-x PMid:24132806
Niforopoulou P, Pantazopoulos I, Demestiha T, Koudouna E, Xanthos T. Video-laryngoscopes in the adult airway management: A topical review of the literature. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010;54(9):1050-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2010.02285.x PMid:20887406
Kaplan MB, Ward DS, Berci G. A new video laryngoscope-an aid to intubation and teaching. J Clin Anesth. 2002;14(8):620-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0952-8180(02)00457-9 PMid:12565125
Luqman, MM, Devadas P. A comparison between USB endoscopic camera mounted McCoy laryngoscope and conventional macintosh laryngoscope aided endotracheal intubation. Int J Sci Res. 2017;6(10):116-9.
Karippacheril JG, Umesh G, Nanda S. Assessment and confirmation of tracheal intubation when capnography fails: A novel use for an USB camera. J Clin Monit Comput. 2013;27(5):531-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-013-9458-1 PMid:23536203
Vadhanan P, Balakrishnan K, Tripaty DK. Evaluation of a low-cost videolaryngoscope a randomized controlled pilot study. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care. 2017;21(4):406-12.
Hernandez MG, Martinez GB, Juarez JS, Villegas HB, Rojas JE, Reyes BA, et al. Novel video-laryngoscope with wireless image transmission via Wi-Fi towards a smartphone. Electronics. 2020;9:1629. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9101629
Kleine-Brueggeney M, Greif R, Schoettker P, Savoldelli GL, Nabecker S, Theiler LG. Evaluation of six video laryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: A multi-center randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth. 2016;116(5):670-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew058 PMid:27106971
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Jorza Sepmiko, Tjok Gde Agung Senapathi, Made Wiryana, I. Putu Kurniyanta, I. Made Gede Widnyana, Ida Bagus Krisna Jaya Sutawan (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0)
