Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:40:42.434Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of new laryngoscope blade for tracheal intubation, Truview EVO2©: a manikin study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2008

L. Miceli ,
M. Cecconi ,
G. Tripi ,
M. Zauli  and
G. Della Rocca
L. Miceli
Affiliation:
University of Udine, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Udine, Italy
M. Cecconi*
Affiliation:
University of Udine, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Udine, Italy
G. Tripi
Affiliation:
University of Udine, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Udine, Italy
M. Zauli
Affiliation:
University of Udine, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Udine, Italy
G. Della Rocca
Affiliation:
University of Udine, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Udine, Italy
*
Correspondence to: Maurizio Cecconi, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Udine, Policlinico Universitario, p.le S. M. Misericordia, 15–33100 Udine, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]; Tel: +39 432559501/2/9; Fax: +39 0432 545526/559512
Get access

Summary

Background and objective

Difficult airways present a clinical challenge for anaesthetists. The Truphatek Truview EVO2© (Truphatek International Ltd, Netanya, Israel) is a new laryngoscope blade used for endotracheal intubation that could be used where there is difficulty in visualizing the laryngeal inlet.

Methods

Twenty anaesthetists (12 trainees and eight consultants) compared the Truphatek Truview EVO2© with a conventional Macintosh size 3 blade. The Trucorp Airsim Bronchi© (Trucorp Ltd, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK) manikin was intubated under normal conditions and under simulated difficult conditions such as tongue inflation and neck rigidity. In each scenario, the Cormack–Lehane grade, time needed for successful intubation, perceived difficulty of tracheal intubation and personal preference of blade were compared. The results were analysed with t-test (time of intubation), Wilcoxon signed-rank sum (Cormack–Lehane grade, ease of manoeuvre, preferred blade) and analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction (augmentation of difficulties in different scenarios).

Results

The Truview EVO2 blade allowed the best laryngeal view as judged by the Cormack–Lehane grade (P < 0.05) in two separate situations: under simulated tongue inflation and under simulated neck rigidity. However, this blade did not reduce the intubation time or the ease of tracheal tube placement with respect to conventional Macintosh blade.

Conclusion

Compared with the classical Macintosh blade, the Truview EVO2 blade allowed a better view of the larynx, but did not facilitate endotracheal intubation in any of the difficult scenarios created with the adjustable manikin and in most scenarios in fact prolonged the intubation time.

Keywords

INTUBATION INTRATRACHEALLARYNGOSCOPES, Macintosh, TruviewAIRWAY OBSTRUCTIONAIRWAY MANAGEMENT
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 25 , Issue 6 , June 2008 , pp. 446 - 449
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Multcaster, JT, Mills, J, Hung, OR et al. Laryngoscopic intubation: learning and performance. Anesthesiology 2003; 98: 23–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Mort, TC. Emergency tracheal intubation: complications associated with repeated laryngoscopic attempts. Anesth Analg 2004; 99: 607–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Gerbeaux, P. Should emergency medical service rescuers be trained to practice endotracheal intubation? Crit Care Med 2005; 33: 1864–1865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Maharaj, CH, Costello, JF, Higgins, BD, Harte, BH, Laffey, JG. Learning and performance of tracheal intubation by novice personnel: a comparison of the Airtraq® and Macintosh laryngoscope. Anesthesia 2006; 61: 671–677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Cormack, RS, Lehane, J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 1105–1111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Benjamin, FJ, Boon, D, French, RA. An evaluation of the Glidescope®, a new video laryngoscope for difficult airways: a manikin study. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2006; 23: 517–521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Silsby, J, Jordan, G, Bayley, G, Cook, TM. Evaluation of four airway training manikins as simulators for inserting the LMA Classic™. Anaesthesia 2006; 61: 576–579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Jackson, KM, Cook, TM. Evaluation of four training manikins as patient simulator for the insertion of eight types of supraglottic airway devices. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 388–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Mallampathi SR. Recognition of the difficult airway. In: Benumof JL, ed. Airway Management: Principles and Practice. St Louis: Mosby, 1996.Google Scholar
10.Lim, TJ, Lim, Y, Liu, EH. Evaluation of ease of intubation with the GlideScope® or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in simulated easy and difficult laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 180–183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed