Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 May;57(3):276-81.
doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.115621.

Role of the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope in the airway management of elective surgical patients: A comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope

Affiliations

Role of the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope in the airway management of elective surgical patients: A comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope

Arpita Saxena et al. Indian J Anaesth. 2013 May.

Abstract

Background: The Truview EVO2(C) laryngoscope (TL) is a recently introduced optical device designed to provide an unmagnified anterior image of the glottic opening and allow indirect laryngoscopy.

Aim: This study is designed to determine whether the TL is a better alternative to the Macintosh laryngoscope (ML) for routine endotracheal intubations in patients with usual airway characteristics.

Methods: We compared the Truview EVO2(C) and MLs in 140 elective surgical patients requiring general anaesthesia and intubation in a prospective crossover fashion. The two blades were compared in terms of Cormack and Lehane grades, time required for intubation, anaesthetists' assessment of ease of intubation, intubation difficulty score, attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy. The Student t test and Chi-square test were used to determine the statistical significance of parametric data and categorical data, respectively.

Results: The Truview EVO2(C) blade provided a better laryngoscopic view than the Macintosh blade as suggested by improved Cormack and Lehane grades (in 48 patients), but required a longer time for intubation than the Macintosh blade (34.1 vs. 22.4 s), i.e., an improved view at the cost of longer mean intubation time. In spite of lower intubation difficulty scores, Truview EVO2(C) was considered as difficult to use on subjective assessment by the anaesthesiologist when compared with Macintosh. There was no difference observed between the two groups in attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy.

Conclusion: We opine that although Truview provides a better laryngoscopic view than Macintosh in difficult cases, it does not have an extra benefit over Macintosh otherwise, further indicating the need for more experience with the use of a Truview laryngoscope.

Keywords: Airway; Macintosh laryngoscope; difficult intubation; equipment; tracheal intubation Truview EVO2(C) laryngoscope.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Truview EVO2 laryngoscope in the operating position
Figure 2
Figure 2
Truview laryngoscope with camera, camera attachment and stylet

References

    1. Shiga T, Wajima Z, Inoue T, Sakamoto A. Predicting difficult intubation in apparently normal patients: A meta-analysis of bedside screening test performance. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:429–37. - PubMed
    1. Rai E, Ramamani, Jacob R. Truview EVO2 Laryngoscope. J Anaesth Clin Pharmacol. 2009;25:199–202.
    1. Li JB, Xiong YC, Wang XL, Fan XH, Li Y, Xu H, et al. An evaluation of the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:940–3. - PubMed
    1. Barak M, Philipchuck P, Abecassis P, Katz Y. A comparison of the Truview blade with the Macintosh blade in adult patients. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:827–31. - PubMed
    1. Timanaykar RT, Anand LK, Palta S. A randomized controlled study to evaluate and compare Truview blade with Macintosh blade for laryngoscopy and intubation under general anesthesia. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2011;27:199–204. - PMC - PubMed