We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
The effect of cricoid pressure on tracheal intubation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2021 January
PURPOSE: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of cricoid pressure (CP) application on intubation outcomes.
SOURCE: Electronic databases (i.e., MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane review) were searched from inception to 2 June 2020 for randomized-controlled trials that assessed the intubation outcomes in adult patients using laryngoscopic approaches with and without the application of CP (i.e., CP vs non-CP group). The primary outcome was the successful first-attempt intubation rate (SFAIR), and the secondary outcomes were intubation time, incidences of poor laryngoscopic views (i.e., Cormack and Lehane grade 3-4), airway complications, and pulmonary aspiration.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of five trials (published from 2005 to 2018) were included, and all tracheal intubations were performed by anesthesiologists or nurse anesthetists with a video (n = 3) or Macintosh laryngoscope (n = 2) in the operating room. We found no significant difference in SFAIR (risk ratio [RR], 0.98; P = 0.37), incidence of poor laryngoscopic views (RR, 1.49; P = 0.21), and risk of sore throat (RR, 1.17; P = 0.73) between the two groups. Nevertheless, the intubation time on the first successful attempt was slightly longer (weighted mean difference = 4.40 sec, P = 0.002) and risk of hoarseness was higher (RR, 1.70; P = 0.03) in the CP group compared with in the non-CP group. The secondary outcome "pulmonary aspiration" was not analyzed because only one trial was available.
CONCLUSION: The application of CP did not have a negative impact on the SFAIR or laryngoscopic view. Nevertheless, this maneuver may slightly prolong intubation time and increase the risk of postoperative hoarseness.
SOURCE: Electronic databases (i.e., MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane review) were searched from inception to 2 June 2020 for randomized-controlled trials that assessed the intubation outcomes in adult patients using laryngoscopic approaches with and without the application of CP (i.e., CP vs non-CP group). The primary outcome was the successful first-attempt intubation rate (SFAIR), and the secondary outcomes were intubation time, incidences of poor laryngoscopic views (i.e., Cormack and Lehane grade 3-4), airway complications, and pulmonary aspiration.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of five trials (published from 2005 to 2018) were included, and all tracheal intubations were performed by anesthesiologists or nurse anesthetists with a video (n = 3) or Macintosh laryngoscope (n = 2) in the operating room. We found no significant difference in SFAIR (risk ratio [RR], 0.98; P = 0.37), incidence of poor laryngoscopic views (RR, 1.49; P = 0.21), and risk of sore throat (RR, 1.17; P = 0.73) between the two groups. Nevertheless, the intubation time on the first successful attempt was slightly longer (weighted mean difference = 4.40 sec, P = 0.002) and risk of hoarseness was higher (RR, 1.70; P = 0.03) in the CP group compared with in the non-CP group. The secondary outcome "pulmonary aspiration" was not analyzed because only one trial was available.
CONCLUSION: The application of CP did not have a negative impact on the SFAIR or laryngoscopic view. Nevertheless, this maneuver may slightly prolong intubation time and increase the risk of postoperative hoarseness.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Review article: Recent advances in ascites and acute kidney injury management in cirrhosis.Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2024 March 26
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