• Timothy P Turkstra, Christopher C Harle, Kevin P Armstrong, Paidrig M Armstrong, Richard A Cherry, Jason Hoogstra, and Philip M Jones.
• Department of Anesthesia & Perioperative Medicine, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. timothy.turkstra@londonhospitals.ca
• Can J Anaesth. 2007 Nov 1;54(11):891-6.

PurposeThe GlideScope videolaryngoscope usually provides excellent glottic visualization, but directing an endotracheal tube (ETT) through the vocal cords can be challenging. The goal of the study was to compare the dedicated GlideScope-specific rigid stylet to the standard malleable stylet, assessed by time to intubation (TTI).MethodsEighty patients requiring orotracheal intubation for elective surgery were randomly allocated to either the GlideScope rigid stylet (GRS) or a standard malleable stylet to facilitate intubation using the GlideScope. Time to intubation was recorded by blinded assessors; operators were blinded until after laryngoscopy. The operator assessed the ease of intubation using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The number of intubation attempts, number of failures, glottic grades, and use of external laryngeal manipulation were documented.ResultsThe median TTI was 42.7 sec (inter-quartile range (IQR) 38.9-56.7) for the GRS group compared to 39.9 sec (IQR 34.1-48.2) for the control group (P=0.07). The median VAS score for ease of intubation was 20 (IQR 12.0-33.0) for the GRS group compared to 18 (IQR 9.5-29.5) for the control group (P=0.21). There was no significant difference in TTI or VAS between stylets. The overall incidence of a Cormack-Lehane grade I or II glottic view was 98%.ConclusionsIn a group of experienced operators using the GlideScope, the dedicated GRS and the standard malleable ETT stylet are equally effective in facilitating endotracheal intubation.

10 keywords...

hide…