Study Objective Video laryngoscopy has primarily been developed to assist in difficult airways. Using video laryngoscopy in pediatric airway management is an up-and-coming topic. The aim of the presented study was to compare the intubation conditions obtained when using the C-MAC video laryngoscope with Miller blades sizes 0 and 1 for standard direct laryngoscopy and indirect laryngoscopy in children weighing less than 10 kg. Design This was a prospective study. Setting The study was performed in a university hospital. Patients Following ethical approval, 86 infants weighing less than 10 kg and undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were studied prospectively. Intervention Indirect and direct laryngoscopy either with C-MAC Miller blade size 0 or size 1. Measurements First, direct laryngoscopy was performed, and the best obtained view was graded without looking at the video monitor. A second investigator blinded to the view obtained under direct laryngoscopy graded the laryngeal view on the video monitor. Time to intubation, intubation conditions, and intubation attempts were recorded. Results In infants less than 10 kg, intubation conditions were excellent. There were no significant differences between the use of Miller blade 0 or 1 in reference to Cormack-Lehane grade, time to intubation, time to best view, or intubation attempts. Comparing direct and indirect intubation conditions using either Miller blade 0 or 1 revealed that the use of indirect laryngoscopy provided a significantly better view (P < 0.05) of the vocal cords. In 3 infants weighing more than 8 kg, the Miller blade 0 was described as too short and narrow for intubation. Conclusions Both devices allowed for an excellent visualization of the vocal cords.
Pediatric Emergency Care – Wolters Kluwer Health
Published: Feb 1, 2017
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud