Easy and difficult nasal intubation - A randomised comparison of Macintosh vs Airtraq® laryngoscopes

29Citations
Citations of this article
36Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A new Airtraq® laryngoscope has been developed for nasal intubation. We prospectively compared tracheal intubation efficiency of the Airtraq for nasotracheal intubation vs that of the Macintosh laryngoscope in 200 patients. Depending on pre-operative airway evaluation, the patients were allocated to expected easy (n = 100) or difficult (n = 100) intubation groups, on the basis of mouth opening ≤ 2.5 cm, modified Mallampati score of 4, history of difficult intubation, obvious tumour or swelling. Patients were randomly allocated to the Macintosh or nasotracheal Airtraq technique. All easy intubations were successfully performed with the respective technique. In the expected difficult intubation group, the success rate was higher (47/50 vs 33/50; p < 0.01), the glottis view was better (Cormack and Lehane 1/2/3/4 grades: 29/17/1/3 vs 5/11/18/16, p < 0.01), mean (SD) intubation time was shorter (45(46) s vs 77(47)s, p < 0.01) and the number of optimising manoeuvres was reduced with the nasotracheal Airtraq compared with the Macintosh, respectively. For difficult nasal intubations, the nasotracheal Airtraq is more effective than the Macintosh laryngoscope. © 2011 Anaesthesia The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

St. Mont, G., Biesler, I., Pförtner, R., Mohr, C., & Groeben, H. (2012). Easy and difficult nasal intubation - A randomised comparison of Macintosh vs Airtraq® laryngoscopes. Anaesthesia, 67(2), 132–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06943.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free