Comparison of fibreoptic-guided intubation through ILMA versus intubation through LMA-CTrach.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 18582259.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05481.x.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We compared the time taken to intubate the trachea of a manikin by fibreoptic-guided intubation through an intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA-FOS) with intubation through a laryngeal mask airway CTrach (LMA-CTrach). Forty-two anaesthetists participated in this randomised crossover study. Although the insertion time was similar, the time taken to intubate the trachea was significantly shorter with the LMA-CTrach as compared with the ILMA-FOS, with a mean time (SD) for ILMA-FOS and CTrach 84 (32) and 53 (21) s, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean difference in the total time between the two techniques was 31 s, with a 95% confidence interval of 22 to 39 s. Thirty (71%) anaesthetists preferred LMA-CTrach as compared with ILMA-FOS (p = 0.008). We conclude that LMA-CTrach is a suitable alternative to fibreoptic-guided intubation through ILMA for the management of unanticipated failed intubation.
Medical subject headings
- Fiber Optic Technology
- Laryngeal Masks