Savino P Brian, Reichelderfer Scott, Mercer Mary P, Wang Ralph C, Sporer Karl A
Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA.
University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA.
Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Aug;24(8):1018-1026. doi: 10.1111/acem.13193. Epub 2017 Jul 25.
The use of video laryngoscopy (VL) for intubation has gained recent popularity. In the prehospital setting, it is unclear if VL increases intubation success rates compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL). We sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing VL to DL in the prehospital setting to determine whether the use of VL increases overall and first-pass endotracheal intubation success rates compared to DL.
A systematic search was performed of the PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS databases through May 2016 to include studies comparing overall and first-pass success for VL versus DL in patients requiring intubation in the prehospital setting. Data were abstracted by two reviewers. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.
Of a potential 472 articles, eight eligible studies were included. Considerable heterogeneity (I > 90%) precluded reporting an overall pooled estimate across all studies. When stratified by provider type, the pooled estimates for overall intubation success using VL versus DL were a risk ratio (RR) of 0.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.01-0.18) in studies of physicians and RR = 2.28 (95% CI = 1.00-5.20) in nonphysicians. For first-pass intubation success the pooled RR estimates for using VL versus DL were 0.32 (95% CI = 0.23-0.44) and 1.83 (95% CI = 1.18-2.84) among studies using physicians and nonphysicians, respectively. There was moderate to significant heterogeneity between studies when stratified by provider.
Among physician intubators with significant DL experience, VL does not increase overall or first-pass success rates and may lead to worsening performance. However, among nonphysician intubators with less experience with DL, VL may provide benefit in the prehospital setting.
视频喉镜(VL)用于气管插管近来受到欢迎。在院前环境中,与直接喉镜(DL)相比,VL是否能提高插管成功率尚不清楚。我们试图对在院前环境中比较VL与DL的研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定与DL相比,使用VL是否能提高总体及首次气管插管成功率。
通过检索PubMed、Embase和SCOPUS数据库,截至2016年5月,纳入在院前环境中需要插管的患者中比较VL与DL总体及首次成功率的研究。由两名评价者提取数据。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。
在潜在的472篇文章中,纳入了8项符合条件的研究。显著的异质性(I²>90%)使得无法报告所有研究的总体合并估计值。按提供者类型分层时,在医生进行的研究中,使用VL与DL相比总体插管成功的合并估计值为风险比(RR)0.05(95%置信区间[CI]=0.01 - 0.18),在非医生进行的研究中RR = 2.28(95% CI = 1.00 - 5.20)。对于首次插管成功,在医生和非医生进行的研究中,使用VL与DL相比的合并RR估计值分别为0.32(95% CI = 0.23 - 0.44)和1.83(95% CI = 1.18 - 2.84)。按提供者分层时,研究间存在中度到显著的异质性。
在有丰富DL经验的医生插管者中,VL不会提高总体或首次成功率,且可能导致操作表现变差。然而,在DL经验较少的非医生插管者中,VL可能在院前环境中带来益处。