Comparison between stylet and bougie with the C-MAC D-blade in cervical simulated immobility. A prospective randomized controlled trial

Nirenjen Sadamaaya Thevar Manoharan, Nita Varghese, Rama Rani Krishna Bhat
{"title":"Comparison between stylet and bougie with the C-MAC D-blade in cervical simulated immobility. A prospective randomized controlled trial","authors":"Nirenjen Sadamaaya Thevar Manoharan, Nita Varghese, Rama Rani Krishna Bhat","doi":"10.5554/22562087.e1061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The C-MAC D-blade was designed for difficult airway intubation scenarios. To facilitate easier and faster endotracheal intubation in the laryngoscopy paradox, an introducer is preferred. Hence, we decided to conduct a study to compare the 60˚ angled C-MAC stylet and the gum elastic bougie as aids to intubation while using the C-MAC D-blade laryngoscope in a simulated difficult airway setting.\nObjective: To compare the ease of oral intubation with the use of the C-MAC stylet (60˚ angled stylet) versus intubation performed over a bougie inserted using the C-MAC D-blade guidance in patients with simulated restricted cervical mobility.\nMethods: Prospective, randomized controlled single-center study. Intubation using the C-MAC D-blade laryngoscope was performed in 48 surgical patients randomly assigned to 2 groups of 24 each: Stylet group, Group S (using 60˚ angled stylet) and Bougie group, Group B (using bougie) after providing manual in-line stabilization to restrict cervical mobility. The Mann-Whitney U test and the Chi square test were used as applicable. \nResults: The use of stylet resulted in easier (Group S 75% vs. Group B 16.7%) and faster (Group S 26.83 ± 8.61s vs. Group B 47.18 ± 16.46s) intubation with fewer attempts compared to group B. Both groups experienced a similar hemodynamic stress response to intubation.\nConclusions: The 60˚ angled C-MAC Stylet is a more effective and time-saving intubation aid with C-MAC D-blade compared to bougie.","PeriodicalId":36529,"journal":{"name":"Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5554/22562087.e1061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The C-MAC D-blade was designed for difficult airway intubation scenarios. To facilitate easier and faster endotracheal intubation in the laryngoscopy paradox, an introducer is preferred. Hence, we decided to conduct a study to compare the 60˚ angled C-MAC stylet and the gum elastic bougie as aids to intubation while using the C-MAC D-blade laryngoscope in a simulated difficult airway setting. Objective: To compare the ease of oral intubation with the use of the C-MAC stylet (60˚ angled stylet) versus intubation performed over a bougie inserted using the C-MAC D-blade guidance in patients with simulated restricted cervical mobility. Methods: Prospective, randomized controlled single-center study. Intubation using the C-MAC D-blade laryngoscope was performed in 48 surgical patients randomly assigned to 2 groups of 24 each: Stylet group, Group S (using 60˚ angled stylet) and Bougie group, Group B (using bougie) after providing manual in-line stabilization to restrict cervical mobility. The Mann-Whitney U test and the Chi square test were used as applicable.  Results: The use of stylet resulted in easier (Group S 75% vs. Group B 16.7%) and faster (Group S 26.83 ± 8.61s vs. Group B 47.18 ± 16.46s) intubation with fewer attempts compared to group B. Both groups experienced a similar hemodynamic stress response to intubation. Conclusions: The 60˚ angled C-MAC Stylet is a more effective and time-saving intubation aid with C-MAC D-blade compared to bougie.
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
探针和C-MAC D-blade探条在颈椎模拟不动中的比较。一项前瞻性随机对照试验
C-MAC D-blade是为困难气道插管场景设计的。在喉镜检查悖论中,为了使气管插管更容易和更快,推荐引入器。因此,我们决定在模拟困难气道环境下使用C-MAC d -刀片喉镜,比较60˚角C-MAC型腔和牙龈弹性伸缩器作为辅助插管的效果。目的:比较C-MAC型(60˚角型)与C-MAC d型刀片引导下的弓支插管在模拟颈椎活动受限患者中的易用性。方法:前瞻性、随机对照、单中心研究。采用C-MAC d刀片喉镜对48例手术患者进行插管,随机分为2组,每组24例:Stylet组,S组(使用60˚角Stylet)和Bougie组,B组(使用Bougie),给予手动在线稳定以限制颈椎活动。适用时采用Mann-Whitney U检验和卡方检验。结果:与B组相比,使用stylet插管更容易(S组75% vs B组16.7%),插管速度更快(S组26.83±8.61s vs B组47.18±16.46s),插管次数较少。两组的血流动力学应激反应相似。结论:60˚角C-MAC Stylet与bougie相比,C-MAC D-blade是一种更有效、更省时的插管辅助工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology
Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
The environmental responsibility of modern anesthesiology and perioperative care Características del paro cardiaco extrahospitalario atendido por operadores de ambulancias en Medellín. Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de base poblacional Shortage of perioperative supplies and drugs: Theory and practical implications Respuesta hemodinámica a dosis subanestésicas de ketamina en dolor posoperatorio: revisión sistemática ChatGPT's learning and reasoning capacity in anesthesiology
×
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