Use of the new McGrath®MAC size-1 paediatric videolaryngoscope

Comparative efficacy of C-MAC® Miller videolaryngoscope versus McGrath® MAC size "1" videolaryngoscope in neonates and infants undergoing surgical procedures under general anesthesia: A prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Various anatomical and physiological factors make intubation in infants challenging. C-MAC videolaryngoscope shows better results as compared to the conventional direct laryngoscopy for intubation in infants. McGrath MAC size-1 with a disposable Macintosh type blade has recently been introduced for use in infants and has not been formally evaluated in this population.

AIMS

This study aims to evaluate the intubation characteristics of C-MAC Miller and McGrath MAC in neonates and infants with the primary objective to compare the time with the two devices.

METHODS

After informed consent from the parents, 140 neonates and infants scheduled for surgical procedures were randomized to undergo intubation with either C-MAC Miller or McGrath MAC after standard general anesthesia. The two devices were compared in terms of total intubation time, Percent of Glottic Opening score, Cormack Lehane grades, time to glottis view, intubation difficulty score, overall success rate, first attempt success rate, and complications.

RESULTS

The median glottic view time (6 s [4-9] vs. 6 s [4-9]; p = .40) and intubation time (27 s [25.5-28] vs. 27 s [24.5-29.5]; p = .87) were similar. The mean difference (95% CI) in time to tracheal intubation and time to glottic view was 0.49 s [-3.1 to 2.1] and -1.7 s [-3.8 to 0.47], respectively. However, the Percent of Glottic Opening score, Cormack Lehane grades, and subjective intubation difficulty were significantly better with C-MAC. The first attempt success rates, overall success rates (100% vs. 97.5%), and intubation difficulty scores were comparable. There were two failed intubations with McGrath which were successfully intubated with C-MAC.

CONCLUSION

The C-MAC Miller blade showed similar intubation timings, success rates, and intubation difficulty score as compared to McGrath MAC in neonates and infants, though the former provided superior glottic views. Both the videolaryngoscopes may be safely used in infants and neonates for routine intubation scenarios.

Evolution of videolaryngoscopy in pediatric population

Direct laryngoscopy has remained the sole method for securing airway ever since the inception of endotracheal intubation. The recent introduction of video-laryngoscopes has brought a paradigm shift in the pratice of airway management. It is claimed that they improve the glottic view and first pass success rates in adult population. The airway management in children is more challenging than adults. The role of videolaryngoscopy for routine intubation in children is not clearly proven. This review attempts to discuss various videolaryngosocpes available for use in pediatric patients.

Difficult Airway Management in Neonates and Infants: Knowledge of Devices and a Device-Oriented Strategy

Difficult airway management (DAM) in neonates and infants requires anesthesiologists and critical care clinicians to respond rapidly with appropriate evaluation of specific situations. Therefore, organizing information regarding DAM devices and device-oriented guidance for neonate and infant DAM treatment will help practitioners select the safest and most effective strategy. Based on DAM device information and reported literature, there are three modern options for DAM in neonates and infants that can be selected according to the anatomical difficulty and device-oriented strategy: (1) video laryngoscope (VLS), (2) supraglottic airway device (SAD), and (3) flexible fiberoptic scope (FOS). Some VLSs are equipped with small blades for infants. Advanced SADs have small sizes for infants, and some effectively function as conduits for endotracheal intubation. The smallest FOS has an outer diameter of 2.2 mm and enables intubation with endotracheal tubes with an inner diameter of 3.0 mm. DAM in neonates and infants can be improved by effectively selecting the appropriate device combination and ensuring that available providers have the necessary skills.

Changing the view: Video versus direct laryngoscopy for intubation in the pediatric emergency department

The aim of this study was to compare the success of first-attempt tracheal intubation in pediatric patients >1-year old performed using video versus direct laryngoscopy and compare the frequency of tracheal intubation-associated events and desaturation among these patients.Prospective observational cohort study conducted in an Academic pediatric tertiary emergency department. We compared 50 children intubated with Mcgrath Mac video laryngoscope (VL group) and an historical series of 141 children intubated with direct laryngoscopy (DL group). All patients were aged 1 to 18 years.The first attempt success rates were 68% (34/50) and 37.6% (53/141) in the VL and DL groups (P < .01), respectively. There was a lower proportion of tracheal intubation-associated events in the VL group (VL, 31.3% [15/50] vs DL, 67.8% [97/141]; P < .01) and no significant differences in desaturation (VL, 35% [14/50] vs DL 51.8% [72/141]; P = .06). The median number of attempts was 1 (range, 1-5) for the VL group and 2 (range, 1-8) for the DL group (P < .01). Multivariate logistic regression showed that video laryngoscope use was associated with higher chances of first-attempt intubation with an odds ratio of 4.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-10.4, P < 0.01).Compared with direct laryngoscopy, VL was associated with higher success rates of first-attempt tracheal intubations and lower rates of tracheal intubation-associated events.