Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Anaesthesia. 2011 Aug;66(8):694-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06762.x. Epub 2011 May 13.
Tracheal intubations with the Airway Scope or the Clarus Video System, a new rigid fibrescope, were compared in 140 patients whose necks were immobilised by cervical collars. The time for intubation, success rate, number of attempts and number of optimisation manoeuvres were assessed. Mean (SD) intubation time was longer with the Airway Scope (30.4 (16.5) s) than with the Clarus Video System (18.9 (15.2) s; p = 0.003) and the median (IQR [range]) number of optimisation manoeuvres was also marginally different; 0 (0-1 [0-2]) with the Airway Scope, 0 (0-0 [0-2]) with the Clarus Video System; p = 0.004. The tracheas of 67 (95.7%) and 66 (94.3%) patients were successfully intubated with the Airway Scope and the Clarus Video System, respectively (p = 1.0). The number of attempts, vital signs and complications were not different between devices. The Clarus Video System was comparable to the Airway Scope in the success rate for tracheal intubation, but provided faster and easier intubations than the Airway Scope in patients with cervical collars.
在 140 例颈部固定于颈托的患者中，对气道镜或 Clarus 视频系统（一种新型刚性纤维镜）进行了气管插管比较。评估了插管时间、成功率、尝试次数和优化操作次数。气道镜的平均（SD）插管时间（30.4（16.5）s）长于 Clarus 视频系统（18.9（15.2）s；p = 0.003），中位数（IQR[范围]）的优化操作次数也略有不同；气道镜为 0（0-1[0-2]），Clarus 视频系统为 0（0-0[0-2]）；p = 0.004。67（95.7%）例患者和 66（94.3%）例患者分别使用气道镜和 Clarus 视频系统成功插管（p = 1.0）。设备之间的尝试次数、生命体征和并发症没有差异。在使用颈托的患者中，Clarus 视频系统与气道镜的气管插管成功率相当，但比气道镜更快、更容易插管。
