Airway Scope-assisted nasotracheal intubation

A comparison of the video laryngoscopes with Macintosh laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation

Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) is usually required in patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery. Though video-scopes have been demonstrated to perform well in oral endotracheal intubation, limited information is available concerning NTI. The aim of the study is to compare the efficiency of video-scopes and the traditional direct laryngoscopy in NTI. One hundred and eight patients scheduled for elective oro-maxillofacial surgery under nasotracheal intubation general anesthesia were randomly allocated into one of 3 groups of GlideScope, Pentax AirWay Scope, or Macintosh laryngoscope respectively. The primary outcome measures were total intubation time and each separate time interval (time A: for placement for the nasotracheal tube from selected nostril to oropharynx; time B: for use of devices to view the glottic opening; time C: for advancing nasotracheal tube from oropharynx into trachea and removing the scope from the oral cavity). The secondary outcomes were measurement of scores of modified naso-intubation difficulty scale (MNIDS) and attempts at intubation.

RESULTS

Mean total intubation time and time C interval were taken with GlideScope (33.1 s and 9.7 s), Pentax (38.4 s and 12.9 s), and Macintosh (42.2 s and 14.9 s) respectively. There was a significant difference among the groups (total time, P = 0.03; time C, P = 0.02). The median score of MNIDS was significantly lower using GlideScope or Pentax compared with using Macintosh in NTI (P = 0.037) and difficult intubation grading by MNIDS presented as easier in the GlideScope group than in the Macintosh group (0.016). Using GlideScope, intubation was successful at the first attempt in 80% patients whereas only 65% and 72.5% with the Pentax and Macintosh (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

As compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the GlideScope video laryngoscope facilitated nasotracheal intubations with shortened intubation time and reduced intubation difficulty in patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgery.

Evaluation of the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation

Background:

The Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope, with its unique optical lens system and blade tip angulation, has proved its usefulness in providing adequate laryngeal exposure and intubation via the oral route. However, the same has not been evaluated for nasotracheal intubation.

Aim:

We evaluated the suitability of the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation.

Methods:

Fifty ASA grade I and II elective surgical patients were studied. Patients aged below 15 years or having difficult airway were excluded. Under standard anesthesia protocol, nasotracheal intubation was performed using a Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope and, in cases of inability to complete intubation in three attempts, the Macintosh laryngoscope was used. Time taken for intubation, use of Magill's forceps and need for optimization maneuvers were noted. The primary outcome was percentage of successful intubation, while hemodynamic changes and duration of intubation were taken as secondary outcomes.

Results:

Majority (94%) could be intubated successfully with the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope. Average time taken for intubation was 50.1 s. The hemodynamic changes were not clinically significant. Regression analysis revealed lack of association between duration of intubation and hemodynamic changes. There were no serious complications.

Conclusion:

The Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope is a useful tool in performing nasotracheal intubation, ensuring a high level of success rate among patients with normal airway anatomy.