2008Anesthesia & AnalgesiaRequires access

Airway Scope and StyletScope for Tracheal Intubation in a Simulated Difficult Airway

Ryu Komatsu, Kotoe Kamata, Keiko Hamada, Daniel I. Sessler, Makoto Ozaki

Open publisher page 26 citations

Abstract

In Brief BACKGROUND: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult when the cervical spine is immobilized. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are new laryngoscopes designed to facilitate intubation under these circumstances. Thus, in patients wearing a rigid cervical collar to simulate a difficult airway, we tested the hypothesis that the intubation success rates of the Airway Scope and StyletScope are similar, but that intubation with Airway Scope is faster. METHODS: Adult patients requiring tracheal intubation as part of anesthesia were enrolled. After anesthesia induction and muscle relaxation, patients’ necks were stabilized with a rigid Philadelphia collar and patients were randomly assigned to tracheal intubation with Airway Scope (n = 50) or StyletScope (n = 50). Overall intubation success rate, time required for intubation, the number of attempts required for successful intubation, and airway complications related to intubation were recorded. RESULTS: Overall intubation success rates were 98% with Airway Scope and 96% with StyletScope. Intubation was 19 s faster with Airway Scope (32[8] s; mean) versus StyletScope (51[29] s). The number of required intubation attempts was similar with each device: 26/18/5 (first/second/third attempt) for Airway Scope versus 26/17/5 for StyletScope. The incidence of mucosal trauma and lip injury was similar, except esophageal intubation occurred only with StyletScope (n = 6); neither dental injury nor hypoxia occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both the Airway Scope and StyletScope offer high success rates in a simulated difficult airway achieved by a rigid collar. However, the Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation. IMPLICATIONS: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult in patients whose cervical spine is immobilized by a rigid collar. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are laryngoscopes designed to facilitate difficult tracheal intubation. Both offer high success rates in these patients, however, Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In Brief BACKGROUND: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult when the cervical spine is immobilized. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are new laryngoscopes designed to facilitate intubation under these circumstances. Thus, in patients wearing a rigid cervical collar to simulate a difficult airway, we tested the hypothesis that the intubation success rates of the Airway Scope and StyletScope are similar, but that intubation with Airway Scope is faster. METHODS: Adult patients requiring tracheal intubation as part of anesthesia were enrolled. After anesthesia induction and muscle relaxation, patients’ necks were stabilized with a rigid Philadelphia collar and patients were randomly assigned to tracheal intubation with Airway Scope (n = 50) or StyletScope (n = 50). Overall intubation success rate, time required for intubation, the number of attempts required for successful intubation, and airway complications related to intubation were recorded. RESULTS: Overall intubation success rates were 98% with Airway Scope and 96% with StyletScope. Intubation was 19 s faster with Airway Scope (32[8] s; mean) versus StyletScope (51[29] s). The number of required intubation attempts was similar with each device: 26/18/5 (first/second/third attempt) for Airway Scope versus 26/17/5 for StyletScope. The incidence of mucosal trauma and lip injury was similar, except esophageal intubation occurred only with StyletScope (n = 6); neither dental injury nor hypoxia occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both the Airway Scope and StyletScope offer high success rates in a simulated difficult airway achieved by a rigid collar. However, the Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation. IMPLICATIONS: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult in patients whose cervical spine is immobilized by a rigid collar. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are laryngoscopes designed to facilitate difficult tracheal intubation. Both offer high success rates in these patients, however, Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In Brief BACKGROUND: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult when the cervical spine is immobilized. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are new laryngoscopes designed to facilitate intubation under these circumstances. Thus, in patients wearing a rigid cervical collar to simulate a difficult airway, we tested the hypothesis that the intubation success rates of the Airway Scope and StyletScope are similar, but that intubation with Airway Scope is faster. METHODS: Adult patients requiring tracheal intubation as part of anesthesia were enrolled. After anesthesia induction and muscle relaxation, patients’ necks were stabilized with a rigid Philadelphia collar and patients were randomly assigned to tracheal intubation with Airway Scope (n = 50) or StyletScope (n = 50). Overall intubation success rate, time required for intubation, the number of attempts required for successful intubation, and airway complications related to intubation were recorded. RESULTS: Overall intubation success rates were 98% with Airway Scope and 96% with StyletScope. Intubation was 19 s faster with Airway Scope (32[8] s; mean) versus StyletScope (51[29] s). The number of required intubation attempts was similar with each device: 26/18/5 (first/second/third attempt) for Airway Scope versus 26/17/5 for StyletScope. The incidence of mucosal trauma and lip injury was similar, except esophageal intubation occurred only with StyletScope (n = 6); neither dental injury nor hypoxia occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Both the Airway Scope and StyletScope offer high success rates in a simulated difficult airway achieved by a rigid collar. However, the Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation. IMPLICATIONS: Direct laryngoscopy is difficult in patients whose cervical spine is immobilized by a rigid collar. The Airway Scope® and StyletScope® are laryngoscopes designed to facilitate difficult tracheal intubation. Both offer high success rates in these patients, however, Airway Scope is faster and less likely to cause esophageal intubation.

Key concepts: Medicine, Airway, Tracheal intubation, Intubation, Scope (computer science), Tracheal tube, Anesthesia, Airway management

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Airway Scope and StyletScope for Tracheal Intubation in a Simulated Difficult Airway — Research Paper | ScholarLens