We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Evaluation of Direct Laryngoscopy Versus GlideScope for the Purpose of Laryngoscopy Management and Intubation in Candidates of Cesarean Delivery with General Anesthesia.
BACKGROUND: The present study aimed at comparing the hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and initiation of intubation with either direct or video-assisted laryngoscopy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 90 pregnant women candidates for cesarean section under general anesthesia. The participants were divided into two groups. In the first group, intubation was performed using direct Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL group). The second group underwent intubation using the GlideScope video laryngoscope (GSL group). Then, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), the percentage of the saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2), the time-to-intubation (TTI), and the number of intubation attempts were recorded.
RESULTS: SBP, DBP, and MAP in the MCL group were significantly higher than GSL group 1, 3, and 5 min after laryngoscopy ( P < 0.05). HR in the MCL group with the mean of 118.44 ± 15.53 bpm was significantly higher than that the GSL group with the mean of 110.11 ± 16.68 bpm only 3 min after laryngoscopy ( P = 0.016). The TTI in the MCL group was significantly longer than that of the GSL group (12.80 ± 1.86 vs. 10.15 ± 2.61; P = 0.001). The frequency of the first intubation attempt in the GSL group with 91.1% was significantly higher than that the MCL group with 84.4% ( P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: It seems that the GSL technique is a better choice to conduct laryngoscopy with more success in intubation and a higher stability of the patients' hemodynamic status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 90 pregnant women candidates for cesarean section under general anesthesia. The participants were divided into two groups. In the first group, intubation was performed using direct Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL group). The second group underwent intubation using the GlideScope video laryngoscope (GSL group). Then, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), the percentage of the saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2), the time-to-intubation (TTI), and the number of intubation attempts were recorded.
RESULTS: SBP, DBP, and MAP in the MCL group were significantly higher than GSL group 1, 3, and 5 min after laryngoscopy ( P < 0.05). HR in the MCL group with the mean of 118.44 ± 15.53 bpm was significantly higher than that the GSL group with the mean of 110.11 ± 16.68 bpm only 3 min after laryngoscopy ( P = 0.016). The TTI in the MCL group was significantly longer than that of the GSL group (12.80 ± 1.86 vs. 10.15 ± 2.61; P = 0.001). The frequency of the first intubation attempt in the GSL group with 91.1% was significantly higher than that the MCL group with 84.4% ( P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: It seems that the GSL technique is a better choice to conduct laryngoscopy with more success in intubation and a higher stability of the patients' hemodynamic status.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
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