Performance of the Airtraq™ laryngoscope after failed conventional tracheal intubation: a case series

Background: The Airtraq^™, a new disposable indirect laryngoscope, was evaluated in patients with difficult intubation.
Methods: The Airtraq^™ was used in 47 patients with predicted or unpredicted difficult intubation after failed orotracheal intubation performed by two senior anaesthesiologists with the Macintosh laryngoscope.
Results: Tracheal intubation with Airtraq^™ was successful in 36 patients (80%). The Cormack and Lehane score was IIb–III in 35 patients, and IV in 12 patients, with the Macintosh laryngoscope, while Cormack and Lehane score was I–IIa in 40 patients, IIb–III in three and IV in four with Airtraq^™. A gum elastic bougie was used to facilitate tracheal access in one-third (11/36) of the cases. Orotracheal intubation was not possible with Airtraq^™ in nine cases, five of whom had a pharyngeal, laryngeal or basal lingual tumour.
Conclusion: In patients with difficult airway, following failed conventional orotracheal intubation, Airtraq^™ allows securing the airway in 80% of cases mainly by improving glottis view. However, the Airtraq^™ does not guarantee successful intubation in all instances, especially in case of laryngeal and/or pharyngeal obstruction.     

Comparison of Macintosh and Airtraq(TM) laryngoscopes in obese patients placed in the ramped position

This study compared intubation conditions produced by the Macintosh and Airtraq^TM laryngoscopes when used in obese patients in the ramped position. One hundred and thirty‐two patients having bariatric surgery were placed in the ramped position and randomly assigned to have their tracheas intubated using either the Macintosh (n = 64) or an Airtraq (n = 68) laryngoscope. Mean (SD) intubation times were 37 (23) s and 14 (3) s for Macintosh and Airtraq, respectively (p < 0.0001). Compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the Airtraq laryngoscope provided an improved vocal cord view as assessed by the Cormack and Lehane score (number of patients with Cormack‐Lehane scores of 1/2/3/4/37/20/4/3 for the Macintosh, and 65/3/0/0 for the Airtraq laryngoscopes, p < 0.0001). One patient in the Macintosh group had a failed intubation and intubation was achieved with the Airtraq. For obese patients in ramped position, Airtraq affords faster tracheal intubation than the Macintosh laryngoscope.     

The GlideScope Ranger® video laryngoscope can be useful in airway management of entrapped patients

Background: Airway management of entrapped patients is challenging and alternatives to endotracheal intubation with a Macintosh laryngoscope must be considered. In this study, the GlideScope Ranger^® video laryngoscope has been evaluated as an alternative to standard laryngoscopy.
Methods: Eight anaesthesiologists from a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service intubated the trachea of a Laerdal SimMan^® manikin using the studied laryngoscopes in two scenarios: (A) unrestricted access to the manikin in an ambulance and (B) no access from the head end, simulating an entrapped patient. The time used to secure the airway and the scored level of difficulty were the main variables.
Results: In scenario A, all anaesthesiologists managed to secure the airway using both techniques within the 60-s time limit. In scenario B, all secured the airway when using the video laryngoscope, while 50% succeeded with endotracheal intubation using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The difference in the success rate was statististically significant ( P =0.025). There were no significant differences in the time spent on endotracheal intubation in the two scenarios or between the devices. All stated that the availability of a video laryngsoscope would make drug-facilitated intubation a realistic alternative when access to patients is limited. The lack of visual control when using the Macintosh laryngoscope excludes this technique in real-life settings.
Conclusion: This study suggests that the Glidescope Ranger^® may be merited in situations requiring endotracheal intubation by an experienced intubator in patient entrapment. Further studies are required to clarify whether performance in patients mimics that in a manikin.     

Evaluation of the GlideScope® for tracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilisation by a semi-rigid collar

Application of cervical collars may reduce cervical spine movements but render tracheal intubation with a standard laryngoscope difficult if not impossible. We hypothesised that despite the presence of a Philadelphia Patriot^® cervical collar and with the patient's head taped to the trolley, tracheal intubation would be possible in 50 adult patients using the GlideScope^® and its dedicated stylet. Laryngoscopy was attempted using a Macintosh laryngoscope with a size 4 blade, and the modified Cormack–Lehane grade was scored. Subsequently, laryngoscopy with the GlideScope was graded and followed by tracheal intubation. All patients' tracheas were successfully intubated with the GlideScope. The median (IQR) intubation time was 50 s (43–61 s). The modified Cormack–Lehane grade was 3 or 4 at direct laryngoscopy. It was significantly reduced with the GlideScope (p < 0.0001), reaching grade 2a in most patients. Tracheal intubation in patients wearing a semi-rigid collar and having their head taped to the trolley is possible with the help of the GlideScope.     

Awake tracheal intubation using the Airtraq® laryngoscope: a case series

The Airtraq^® laryngoscope (AL) is a new single use indirect laryngoscope designed to facilitate tracheal intubation in anaesthetised patients either with normal or difficult airway anatomy. It is designed to provide a view of the glottis without alignment of the oral, pharyngeal and tracheal axes. We report four cases of successful awake tracheal intubation using the AL. The first case is a patient with severe ankylosing spondylitis and the other three cases with anticipated difficult airway. An awake intubation under sedation and topical airway anaesthesia was chosen. We consider that the AL can be used effectively to accomplish an awake intubation in patients with a suspected or known difficult airway and may be a useful alternative where other methods for awake intubation have failed or are not available.     

Comparison of the C‐MAC® videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh,Glidescope®, and Airtraq® laryngoscopes in easy and difficult laryngoscopy scenarios in manikins

The C‐MAC^® comprises a Macintosh blade connected to a video unit. The familiarity of the Macintosh blade, and the ability to use the C‐MAC as a direct or indirect laryngoscope, may be advantageous. We wished to compare the C‐MAC with Macintosh, Glidescope^® and Airtraq^® laryngoscopes in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy. Thirty‐one experienced anaesthetists performed tracheal intubation in an easy and difficult laryngoscopy scenario. The duration of intubation attempts, success rates, number of intubation attempts and of optimisation manoeuvres, the severity of dental compression, and difficulty of device use were recorded. In easy laryngoscopy, the duration of tracheal intubation attempts were similar with the C‐MAC, Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopes; the Glidescope performed less well. The C‐MAC and Airtraq provided the best glottic views, but the C‐MAC was rated as the easiest device to use. In difficult laryngo‐scopy the C‐MAC demonstrated the shortest tracheal intubation times. The Airtraq provided the best glottic view, with the Macintosh providing the worst view. The C‐MAC was the easiest device to use.     

Tracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial comparing performance of Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopes

BACKGROUND: The Airtraq laryngoscope is designed to allow visualization of the glottis without alignment of the oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal axes. We hypothesized that this new airway device would facilitate tracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients. We compared tracheal intubation performance of standard Macintosh laryngoscope with the Airtraq laryngoscope in morbidly obese patients. METHODS: One hundred and six consecutive ASA I-III morbidly obese patients undergoing surgery were randomized to intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope or the Airtraq laryngoscope. Induction of anaesthesia was standardized. If tracheal intubation failed within 120 s with the Macintosh or Airtraq , laryngoscopes were switched. Success rate, SpO2, duration of tracheal intubation, and quality of airway management were evaluated and compared between the groups. RESULTS: Preoperative characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. In the Airtraq group, tracheal intubation was successfully carried out in all patients within 120 s. In the Macintosh laryngoscope group, six patients required intubation with the Airtraq laryngoscope. The mean (SD) time taken for tracheal intubation was 24 (16) and 56 (23) s, respectively, with the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes, (P<0.001). SpO2 was better maintained in the Airtraq group than in the Macintosh laryngoscope group with one and nine patients, respectively, demonstrating drops of SpO2 to 92% or less (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the Airtraq laryngoscope shortened the duration of tracheal intubation and prevented reductions in arterial oxygen saturation in morbidly obese patients.     

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

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.     

Manejo de vía aérea en pacientes COVID-19: una encuesta sobre la experiencia de 1125 médicos en España

BackgroundWe explored the experience of clinicians from the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology in airway management of COVID-19 patients.MethodsAn software-based survey including a 32-item questionnaire was conducted from April 18 to May 17, 2020. Participants who have been involved in tracheal intubations in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were included anonymously after obtaining their informed consent. The primary outcome was the preferred airway device for tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included the variations in clinical practice including the preferred video laryngoscope, plans for difficult airway management, and personal protective equipment.Results1125 physicians completed the questionnaire with a response rate of 40,9%. Most participants worked in public hospitals and were anesthesiologists.The preferred device for intubation was the video laryngoscope (5.1/6), with the type of device in decreasing order as follows: Glidescope, C-MAC, Airtraq, McGrath and King Vision. The most frequently used device for intubation was the video laryngoscope (70,5%), using them in descending order as follow: the Airtraq, C-MAC, Glidescope, McGrath and King Vision.Discomfort of intubating wearing personal protective equipment and the frequency of breaching a security step was statistically significant, increasing the risk of cross infection between patients and physicians. The opinion of senior doctors differed from younger physicians in the type of video-laryngoscope used, the number of experts involved in tracheal intubation and the reason that caused more stress during the airway management.ConclusionsMost physicians preferred using a video-laryngoscope with remote monitor and disposable Macintosh blade, using the Frova guide.     

Learning and performance of tracheal intubation by novice personnel: a comparison of the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscope

Direct laryngoscopic tracheal intubation is taught to many healthcare professionals as it is a potentially lifesaving procedure. However, it is a difficult skill to acquire and maintain, and, of concern, the consequences of poorly performed intubation attempts are potentially serious. The Airtraq Laryngoscope is a novel intubation device which may possess advantages over conventional direct laryngoscopes for use by novice personnel. We conducted a prospective trial with 40 medical students who had no prior airway management experience. Following brief didactic instruction, each participant took turns in performing laryngoscopy and intubation using the Macintosh and Airtraq devices under direct supervision. Each student was allowed up to three attempts to intubate in three laryngoscopy scenarios using a Laerdal Intubation Trainer and one scenario in a Laerdal SimMan Manikin. They then performed tracheal intubation of the normal airway a second time to characterise the learning curve for each device. The Airtraq provided superior intubating conditions, resulting in greater success of intubation, particularly in the difficult laryngoscopy scenarios. In both easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy scenarios, the Airtraq decreased the duration of intubation attempts, reduced the number of optimisation manoeuvres required, and reduced the potential for dental trauma. The Airtraq device showed a rapid learning curve and the students found it significantly easier to use. The Airtraq appears to be a superior device for novice personnel to acquire the skills of tracheal intubation.     

A comparison of McGrath and Macintosh laryngoscopes in novice users: a manikin study

Direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope is a difficult skill to acquire. Videolaryngoscopy is a widely accepted airway management technique that may be easier for novices to learn. We compared the McGrath^® videolaryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope by studying the performance of 25 medical students with no previous experience of performing tracheal intubation using an easy intubation scenario in a manikin. The order of device use was randomised for each student. After brief instruction each participant performed eight tracheal intubations with one device and then eight tracheal intubations with the other laryngoscope. Novices achieved a higher overall rate of successful tracheal intubation, avoided oesophageal intubation and produced less dental trauma when using the McGrath. The view at laryngoscopy was significantly better with the McGrath. Intubation times were similar for both laryngoscopes and became shorter with practice. There was no difference in participants' rating of overall ease of use for each laryngoscope.     

Endotracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilization: a comparison of macintosh and airtraq laryngoscopes

BACKGROUND: The Airtraq laryngoscope (Prodol Ltd., Vizcaya, Spain) is a novel single-use tracheal intubation device. The authors compared ease of intubation with the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine immobilization in a randomized, controlled clinical trial. METHODS: Forty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Macintosh (n = 20) or Airtraq (n = 20) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of four anesthesiologists experienced in the use of both laryngoscopes. RESULTS: No significant differences in demographic or airway variables were observed between the groups. All but one patient, in the Macintosh group, were successfully intubated on the first attempt. The Airtraq reduced the duration of intubation attempts (mean +/- SD: 13.2 +/- 5.5 vs. 20.3 +/- 12.2 s), the need for additional maneuvers, and the intubation difficulty scale score (0.1 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.7 +/- 2.5). Tracheal intubation with the Airtraq caused fewer alterations in blood pressure and heart rate. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the utility of the Airtraq laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilization.     

Endotracheal Intubation in Patients with Cervical Spine Immobilization: A Comparison of Macintosh and Airtraq Laryngoscopes

Background: The Airtraq laryngoscope (Prodol Ltd., Vizcaya, Spain) is a novel single-use tracheal intubation device. The authors compared ease of intubation with the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine immobilization in a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Methods: Forty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Macintosh (n = 20) or Airtraq (n = 20) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of four anesthesiologists experienced in the use of both laryngoscopes.

Results: No significant differences in demographic or airway variables were observed between the groups. All but one patient, in the Macintosh group, were successfully intubated on the first attempt. The Airtraq reduced the duration of intubation attempts (mean +/- SD: 13.2 +/- 5.5 vs. 20.3 +/- 12.2 s), the need for additional maneuvers, and the intubation difficulty scale score (0.1 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.7 +/- 2.5). Tracheal intubation with the Airtraq caused fewer alterations in blood pressure and heart rate.     

The learning curve for laryngoscopy: Airtraq versus Macintosh laryngoscopes

Purpose

Airtraq use by inexperienced personnel has been evaluated in simulator studies, but little is known about the learning process in real patients. This prospective study was designed to compare learning curves for laryngoscopy with the Airtraq or Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients under general anesthesia.

Methods

Ten medical students with no prior experience in airway management were recruited on a voluntary basis and underwent training in Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopy. Patients with no difficult intubation criteria were enrolled after consent. Each student performed laryngoscopy with either device on ten consecutive patients. Success was defined as Cormack–Lehane grading ≤2. We also recorded subjective difficulty scores on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Learning curves were drawn using cumulative success rates and 95% confidence intervals calculated with bootstrap procedures.

Results

The mean (95% CI) success rates for the procedures were 86.0% (76.7–93.3%) for the Airtraq and 64.0% (52.0–75.0%) for the Macintosh laryngoscope. Differences in success rate were significant from the fourth attempt and were 22.0% (8.2–36.5%) after the tenth. Seven students achieved success rates ≥90% using the Airtraq, versus one using the Macintosh (P?=?0.022). Median (25th–75th percentile) difficulty scores were 2 (1–4) and 4 (2–6), respectively (P?Conclusion Students achieved higher success rates using the Airtraq laryngoscope during early training on live patients. The Airtraq may be a useful choice for teaching advanced airway management, especially to professionals who will not perform laryngoscopy on a regular basis.     

Evaluation of the Airtraq and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients at increased risk for difficult tracheal intubation

The Airtraq, a novel single use indirect laryngoscope, has demonstrated promise in the normal and simulated difficult airway. We compared the ease of intubation using the Airtraq with the Macintosh laryngoscope, in patients at increased risk for difficult tracheal intubation, in a randomised, controlled clinical trial. Forty consenting patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation, who were deemed to possess at least three characteristics indicating an increased risk for difficulty in tracheal intubation, were randomly assigned to undergo tracheal intubation using a Macintosh (n = 20) or Airtraq (n = 20) laryngoscope. All patients were intubated by one of three anaesthetists experienced in the use of both laryngoscopes. Four patients were not successfully intubated with the Macintosh laryngoscope, but were intubated successfully with the Airtraq. The Airtraq reduced the duration of intubation attempts (mean (SD); 13.4 (6.3) vs 47.7 (8.5) s), the need for additional manoeuvres, and the intubation difficulty score (0.4 (0.8) vs 7.7 (3.0)). Tracheal intubation with the Airtraq also reduced the degree of haemodynamic stimulation and minor trauma compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope.     

Video-laryngoscopes in the adult airway management: a topical review of the literature

The aim of the present paper is to review the literature regarding video-laryngoscopes (Storz V-Mac and C-Mac, Glidescope, McGrath, Pentax-Airway Scope, Airtraq and Bullard) and discuss their clinical role in airway management. Video-laryngoscopes are new intubation devices, which provide an indirect view of the upper airway. In difficult airway management, they improve Cormack-Lehane grade and achieve the same or a higher intubation success rate in less time, compared with direct laryngoscopes. Despite the very good visualization of the glottis, the insertion and advancement of the endotracheal tube with video-laryngoscopes may occasionally fail. Each particular device's features may offer advantages or disadvantages, depending on the situation the anaesthesiologist has to deal with. So far, there is inconclusive evidence indicating that video-laryngoscopy should replace direct laryngoscopy in patients with normal or difficult airways.     

A comparison of direct and indirect laryngoscopes and the ILMA in novice users: a manikin study

Direct laryngoscopic tracheal intubation using the Macintosh laryngoscope is taught to many healthcare professionals as it is a potentially life-saving procedure. However, it is a difficult skill to acquire and maintain. Several alternative intubation devices exist that may provide a better view of the glottis and require less skill to use. We conducted a prospective, randomised trial of four different laryngoscopes and the ILMA in 30 medical students who had no prior airway management experience. The devices were tested in both normal and cervical immobilisation laryngoscopy scenarios. Following brief didactic instruction, each participant took turns performing laryngoscopy and intubation using each device under direct supervision. Each student was allowed up to three intubation attempts with each device, in each scenario. The Airtraq, McCoy, and the ILMA each demonstrated advantages over the Macintosh laryngoscope. In both the easy and difficult airway scenarios, the Airtraq, McCoy, and the ILMA reduced the number of intubation attempts, and reduced the number of optimisation manoeuvres required. The Airtraq and ILMA reduced the severity of dental trauma in both scenarios. The performance of the other devices studied was more variable. Overall, participants found that only the Airtraq was less difficult to use and they were more confident using it compared to the Macinosh laryngoscope.     

Combining the EndoFlex® tube with fiberoptic bronchoscopy in difficult intubation

We applied a combination technique using the EndoFlex^® tube with fiberoptic bronchoscopy for a 69-year-old man presenting with limited mouth opening and neck movement. Awake nasotracheal intubation was performed under conscious sedation with propofol and fentanyl. After positioning the tip of the EndoFlex^® tube in the oropharynx, the fiberoptic bronchoscope was inserted into the tube until the tip reached the bevel of the tube. Anterior flexion of the distal tip of the EndoFlex^® tube facilitated uncomplicated insertion of the tube into the trachea without impingement on the arytenoids. Fiberoptic visualization confirmed that the distal-tip flexing mechanism of the EndoFlex^® tube corrected the direction of the tube tip anteriorly, allowing entry into the trachea. We present a case where this technique proved valuable for tracheal intubation in a patient with limitations of mouth opening and neck movement.     

Evaluation of the Video Intubation Unit in morbid obese patients

Background: Tracheal intubation may be more difficult in morbidly obese (MO) patients than in the non-obese. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinically if the use of the Video Intubation Unit (VIU), a video-optical intubation stylet, could improve the laryngoscopic view compared with the standard Macintosh laryngoscope in this specific population.
Methods: We studied 40 MO patients (body mass index >35 kg/m²) scheduled for bariatric surgery. Each patient had a conventional laryngoscopy and a VIU inspection. The laryngoscopic grades (LG) using the Cormack and Lehane scoring system were noted and compared. Thereafter, the patients were randomised to be intubated with one of the two techniques. In one group, the patients were intubated with the help of the VIU and in the control group, tracheal intubation was performed conventionally. The duration of intubation, as well as the minimal SpO₂ achieved during the procedure, were measured.
Results: Patient characteristics were similar in both groups. Seventeen patients had a direct LG of 2 or 3 (no patient had a grade of 4). Out of these 17 patients, the LG systematically improved with the VIU and always attained grade 1 ( P <0.0001). The intubation time was shorter within the VIU group, but did not attain significance. There was no difference in the SpO₂ post-intubation.
Conclusion: In MO patients, the use of the VIU significantly improves the visualisation of the larynx, thereby improving the intubation conditions.     

A comparison of the McGrath® Series 5 videolaryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope for double‐lumen tracheal tube placement in patients with a good glottic view at direct laryngoscopy

We compared the McGrath^® Series 5 videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope for double‐lumen tracheal tube placement in patients with a predicted good glottic view on assessment of the airway. An initial laryngoscopy was performed using the Macintosh laryngoscope; 96 patients with Cormack and Lehane grade‐1 or ‐2a views were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using either the McGrath or Macintosh device. Compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the McGrath videolaryngoscope provided more Cormack and Lehane grade‐1 views (47 (97.9%) vs 29 (60.4%), p < 0.05), a longer mean (SD) intubation time (39.6 (10.0) s vs 24.4 (7.3) s, p < 0.05) and a higher incidence of double‐lumen tube malposition (6 (12.5%) vs 0, p < 0.05). However, in 18 non‐randomised patients with Cormack and Lehane grade ≥ 2b on initial laryngoscopy using the Macintosh, the glottic view was improved on intubation with the McGrath videolaryngoscope, with a total success rate of double‐lumen tube placement of 94.4% and mean (SD) intubation time of 50.0 (18.6) s. We recommend that in patients with a low airway risk index score requiring intubation with a double‐lumen tracheal tube, the Macintosh laryngoscope is used as the first device and the McGrath videolaryngoscope is used only if this provides a poor glottic view.