Samal Rajiba Lochan, Swain Sumita, Samal Soumya
Department of Anaesthesiology, IMS and SUM Hospital, SOA Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Anesth Essays Res. 2021 Jan-Mar;15(1):73-80. doi: 10.4103/aer.aer_62_21. Epub 2021 Aug 30.
Video laryngoscopes resemble traditional laryngoscopes, but they have a video chip embedded in the tip of laryngoscope blade. This enables the operator to "look around the corners" which is not possible with conventional direct laryngoscopes. The present study was undertaken to compare Truview video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope for glottis visualization, ease of tracheal intubation, and associated hemodynamic response.
The study was conducted in operation theater in a medical college.
It was a randomized prospective observational study.
Sixty patients of American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade 1 and 2 of either sex aged 18-60 years who were scheduled to undergo elective surgery requiring general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation were selected. In patients of Group T ( = 30), intubation was done using Truview video laryngoscope, while in Group M ( = 30), intubation was done using Macintosh laryngoscope. Various airway and hemodynamic parameters were assessed and compared.
Statistical analysis was done using Chi-square test, paired and unpaired Student's -test, and ANOVA test. < 0.05 is considered statistically significant.
Distribution of modified Mallampati Class (MMPC), ease of laryngoscopic blade insertion, and size of cuffed endotracheal tube used were statistically comparable in both the groups. The time to intubation was more in Group T (37.16 ± 8.23 s) as compared to Group M (29.80 ± 6.75 s). There was a statistically significant better modified Cormack and Lehane (CL) grading view obtained in Group T as compared to Group M ( = 0.025). CL Grades 2 and 3 were not seen in any of either of the group. The mean intubation difficulty score (IDS) was significantly lower in Group T (0.3 ± 0.60) as compared to Group M (0.73 ± 0.86). In both the Groups T and M, the mean heart rate, systolic blood pressure (BP), and diastolic BP were significantly increased from baseline for up to 3 min after laryngoscopy, but they were comparable between the two groups all the time.
Truview propaganda cum distribution laryngoscope provides a better glottis view than the Macintosh laryngoscope. Although it requires a longer time to intubate using Truview, the overall IDS score was lower as compared to Macintosh laryngoscope. Hemodynamic changes remained similar in both the groups.
可视喉镜与传统喉镜相似，但在喉镜镜片尖端嵌入了视频芯片。这使操作者能够“看到拐角处”，而传统直接喉镜则无法做到。本研究旨在比较Truview可视喉镜和Macintosh喉镜在声门可视化、气管插管的难易程度及相关血流动力学反应方面的差异。
本研究在一所医学院的手术室进行。
这是一项随机前瞻性观察研究。
选取60例年龄在18 - 60岁、美国麻醉医师协会分级为1级和2级、计划接受需要全身麻醉和经口气管插管的择期手术的患者，性别不限。T组（n = 30）患者使用Truview可视喉镜进行插管，而M组（n = 30）患者使用Macintosh喉镜进行插管。评估并比较各种气道和血流动力学参数。
采用卡方检验、配对和非配对学生t检验以及方差分析进行统计分析。P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
两组患者改良Mallampati分级（MMPC）的分布、喉镜镜片插入的难易程度以及所使用的带套囊气管导管的尺寸在统计学上具有可比性。T组的插管时间（37.16 ± 8.23秒）比M组（29.80 ± 6.75秒）长。与M组相比，T组获得的改良Cormack和Lehane（CL）分级视野在统计学上有显著改善（P = 0.025）。两组均未出现CL 2级和3级。T组的平均插管困难评分（IDS）（0.3 ± 0.60）明显低于M组（0.73 ± 0.86）。在T组和M组中，喉镜检查后长达3分钟内，平均心率、收缩压（BP）和舒张压均较基线显著升高，但两组之间始终具有可比性。
Truview宣传推广喉镜比Macintosh喉镜能提供更好的声门视野。虽然使用Truview插管需要更长时间，但与Macintosh喉镜相比，总体IDS评分更低。两组的血流动力学变化相似。
