Assessing the efficacy of video versus direct laryngoscopy through retrospective comparison of 436 emergency intubation cases

Abstract

Video laryngoscopy has become a common practice for tracheal intubations. However, information on its efficacy in emergency intubations is minimal. The external video monitor may act as a means for assistance by present staff, heighten teaching ability, and improve intubation outcomes. We conducted a retrospective review consisting of 436 patients requiring emergency intubation outside the operating room to evaluate the application of a C-MAC video laryngoscope for emergency intubation(s). Nine cases were removed, 315 underwent direct laryngoscopy, 73 underwent video laryngoscopy, and 39 underwent both methods. The C-MAC laryngoscope provided a significantly better visualization of the glottis (p = 0.02). The C-MAC also provided successful intubation on the first attempt in 82 % of the 39 direct laryngoscopy cases subsequently intubated with the C-MAC. The presence of the attending anesthesiologist (while the resident intubates) had no effect on complication rates; the number of attempts required and the grade view obtained were nonsignificant (p = 0.91 and p = 0.34, respectively). Overall, use of the C-MAC video laryngoscope provided a better view of the airway structures during an emergency intubation. The success of the C-MAC laryngoscope in intubation after failed direct laryngoscopy suggests the importance of the video laryngoscope as the primary intubation approach during an emergency intubation.