Evaluating the predictive efficacy of the El-Ganzouri risk index for difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with King Vision video laryngoscope: A prospective cohort study.

IF 2.9 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Indian Journal of Anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-26 DOI:10.4103/ija.ija_474_24
Aneeta Elizabeth Baby, Moses Charles D'souza, Mathangi Krishnakumar, Dicin Davis Kavalakkatt
{"title":"Evaluating the predictive efficacy of the El-Ganzouri risk index for difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with King Vision<sup>™</sup> video laryngoscope: A prospective cohort study.","authors":"Aneeta Elizabeth Baby, Moses Charles D'souza, Mathangi Krishnakumar, Dicin Davis Kavalakkatt","doi":"10.4103/ija.ija_474_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>El-Ganzouri risk index (EGRI) scoring is a predictive tool for difficult video laryngoscope (VL) guided tracheal intubation, and its use has been studied for various VLs. This study evaluates the predictive value of EGRI scoring for difficult laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation with King Vision<sup>™</sup> VL.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Airway assessment was performed preinduction using the EGRI score. Following induction, initial laryngeal visualisation with a Macintosh blade identified the Cormack-Lehane grade. Final laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were done using the King Vision<sup>™</sup> VL, assessing the view with Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO), Fremantle scores and ease with the modified Intubation Difficulty Scale. EGRI's predictive power was evaluated through statistical analyses using Chi-square, <i>t</i>-test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 21.0 was used for analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 250 patients were included in the study, and the cut-off value of EGRI was 4. EGRI was assessed using the POGO and Fremantle scores for the view obtained during VL. The optimal cut-off for EGRI score was 3. ROC for difficult airways was calculated and compared to other scores. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were 82%, 86% and 0.9, respectively, for the POGO score and 74%, 92% and 0.85, respectively, for the Fremantle score. The ease of tube placement when assessed using a modified intubation difficulty scale was evaluated, and the sensitivity, specificity and AUC values were 95%, 86% and 0.94, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EGRI scoring can effectively predict difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with the King Vision<sup>™</sup> video laryngoscope.</p>","PeriodicalId":13339,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","volume":"68 11","pages":"1003-1009"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626877/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_474_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: El-Ganzouri risk index (EGRI) scoring is a predictive tool for difficult video laryngoscope (VL) guided tracheal intubation, and its use has been studied for various VLs. This study evaluates the predictive value of EGRI scoring for difficult laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation with King Vision VL.

Methods: Airway assessment was performed preinduction using the EGRI score. Following induction, initial laryngeal visualisation with a Macintosh blade identified the Cormack-Lehane grade. Final laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were done using the King Vision VL, assessing the view with Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO), Fremantle scores and ease with the modified Intubation Difficulty Scale. EGRI's predictive power was evaluated through statistical analyses using Chi-square, t-test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 21.0 was used for analysis.

Results: A total of 250 patients were included in the study, and the cut-off value of EGRI was 4. EGRI was assessed using the POGO and Fremantle scores for the view obtained during VL. The optimal cut-off for EGRI score was 3. ROC for difficult airways was calculated and compared to other scores. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were 82%, 86% and 0.9, respectively, for the POGO score and 74%, 92% and 0.85, respectively, for the Fremantle score. The ease of tube placement when assessed using a modified intubation difficulty scale was evaluated, and the sensitivity, specificity and AUC values were 95%, 86% and 0.94, respectively.

Conclusion: EGRI scoring can effectively predict difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with the King Vision video laryngoscope.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
44.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊最新文献
ERAS- Challenges and Opportunities: IJA Infographics. Evaluating the predictive efficacy of the El-Ganzouri risk index for difficult laryngoscopy and intubation with King Vision video laryngoscope: A prospective cohort study. Challenges and opportunities in enhanced recovery after surgery programs: An overview. Comparison of Adequacy of Anaesthesia (AoA) monitors with CONOX® monitor regarding sevoflurane consumption during routine general anaesthesia: A randomised clinical trial. Comparison of analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided external oblique intercostal plane block and subcostal transversus abdominis plane block in patients undergoing upper abdominal surgery: A randomised clinical study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1