Rigid fibrescope Bonfils: use in simulated difficult airway by novices

Abstract

Background: The Bonfils intubation fibrescope is a promising alternative device for securing the airway. We examined the success rate of intubation and the ease of use in standardized simulated difficult airway scenarios by physicians. We compared the Bonfils to a classical laryngoscope with Macintosh blade.

Methods: 30 physicians untrained in the use of rigid fibrescopes but experienced in airway management performed endotracheal intubation in an airway manikin (SimMan, Laerdal, Kent, UK) with three different airway conditions. We evaluated the success rate using the Bonfils (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) or the Macintosh laryngoscope, the time needed for securing the airway, and subjective rating of both techniques.

Results: In normal airway all intubations were successful using laryngoscope (100%) vs. 82% using the Bonfils (p < 0.05). In the scenario "tongue oedema" success rate using the Macintosh laryngoscope was 67% and 83% using the Bonfils. In the scenario "decreased cervical range of motion with jaw trismus", success rate using the Macintosh laryngoscope was 84% vs. 76%. In difficult airway scenarios time until airway was secured did not differ between the two devices. Use of Bonfils was rated "easier" in both difficult airway scenarios.

Conclusion: The Bonfils can be successfully used by physicians unfamiliar with this technique in an airway manikin. The airway could be secured with at least the same success rate as using a Macintosh laryngoscope in difficult airway scenarios. Use of the Bonfils did not delay intubation in the presence of a difficult airway. These results indicate that intensive special training is advised to use the Bonfils effectively in airway management.

Figure 1

The Bonfils Intubation Fibrescope (Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG, Tuttlingen, Germany).

Figure 2

Successful intubation for different airway scenarios.

Figure 3

Time until airway was secured using Bonfils and Macintosh laryngoscope in different airway scenarios.

Figure 4

Rating of both techniques in the three scenarios. 10 = extremely easy, 0 = extremely difficult.