We have located links that may give you full text access.
Video Laryngoscopy or Macintosh Laryngoscopy: Which One Is More Successful in Patients With Bilateral Mandibular Fractures?
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2018 September
PURPOSE: Successful intubation is challenging in patients with bilateral mandibular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the video laryngoscope (VL) with the Macintosh laryngoscope (ML) for intubation of patients with bilateral mandibular fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial study, patients who had bilateral mandibular fractures (angle or subcondylar) were studied. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups using computerized randomization. Laryngoscopy was performed by the ML in group 1 and the VL in group 2. Intubation device (ML or VL) was the predictive factor of the study and age, maximum mouth opening (MMO), incisor fracture, and gender were the variables. Intubation time and successful intubation at the first attempt were the study outcomes. Independent t test was applied to compare intubation time, MMO, and age between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients were studied (40 in group 1 and 38 in group 2). Mean intubation time was 33.02 ± 9.68 seconds in group 1 and 39.16 ± 7.40 seconds in group 2. Comparison of the data showed a significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .002). Twenty-four patients in group 1 and 31 in group 2 were successfully intubated at the first attempt. There was a significant difference in the number of successful or failed intubation attempts between the 2 groups (P = .03).
CONCLUSION: According to the present findings, use of the VL increased the first-attempt success rate of intubation in patients with bilateral mandibular fractures. Time of intubation could be longer when using the VL than when using the ML.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial study, patients who had bilateral mandibular fractures (angle or subcondylar) were studied. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups using computerized randomization. Laryngoscopy was performed by the ML in group 1 and the VL in group 2. Intubation device (ML or VL) was the predictive factor of the study and age, maximum mouth opening (MMO), incisor fracture, and gender were the variables. Intubation time and successful intubation at the first attempt were the study outcomes. Independent t test was applied to compare intubation time, MMO, and age between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients were studied (40 in group 1 and 38 in group 2). Mean intubation time was 33.02 ± 9.68 seconds in group 1 and 39.16 ± 7.40 seconds in group 2. Comparison of the data showed a significant difference between the 2 groups (P = .002). Twenty-four patients in group 1 and 31 in group 2 were successfully intubated at the first attempt. There was a significant difference in the number of successful or failed intubation attempts between the 2 groups (P = .03).
CONCLUSION: According to the present findings, use of the VL increased the first-attempt success rate of intubation in patients with bilateral mandibular fractures. Time of intubation could be longer when using the VL than when using the ML.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app