Comparison of the C‐MAC® and GlideScope® videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine disorders and immobilisation |
| |
| Authors: | S Brück H Trautner A Wolff J Hain G Mols P Pakos N Roewer M Lange |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany;2. Department of Cardioanaesthesia, University Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany;3. Department of Mathematics, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany;4. Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Ortenau Klinikum Lahr‐Ettenheim, Lahr, Germany;5. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany;6. Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Mathias‐Spital‐Rheine, Rheine, Germany |
| |
| Abstract: | In‐line stabilisation of the neck can increase the difficulty of tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy. We randomly assigned 56 patients with cervical spine pathology scheduled for elective surgery to tracheal intubation using either the C‐MAC® (n = 26) or GlideScope® (n = 30), when the head and neck were stabilised in‐line. There was no significant difference in the median (IQR range]) intubation times between the C‐MAC (19 (14–35 9–90]) s and the GlideScope (23, (15–32 8–65]) s. The first‐attempt failure rate for the C‐MAC was 42% (95% CI 23–63%) compared with 7% (95% CI 1–22%) for the GlideScope, p = 0.002. The laryngeal view was excellent and comparable with both devices, with the C‐MAC requiring significantly more attempts and optimising manoeuvers (11 vs 5, respectively, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in postoperative complaints e.g. sore throat, hoarseness and dysphagia. Both devices provided an excellent glottic view in patients with cervical spine immobilisation, but tracheal intubation was more often successful on the first attempt with the GlideScope. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
