Haemodynamic response at double lumen bronchial tube placement - Airtraq vs. MacIntosh laryngoscope, a randomised controlled trial
- PMID: 25861591
- PMCID: PMC4381823
Haemodynamic response at double lumen bronchial tube placement - Airtraq vs. MacIntosh laryngoscope, a randomised controlled trial
Abstract
Introduction: Tracheal intubation causes a haemodynamic response that might be harmful for patients. The Airtraq® laryngoscope has been shown to decrease the haemodynamic response to single-lumen tube intubation. We hypothesised that double-lumen bronchial tube placement with the Double-lumen Airtraq® laryngoscope would cause a reduced haemodynamic response and decreased catecholamine release compared with the MacIntosh laryngoscope.
Methods: Forty adult patients were randomly assigned to the Airtraq® group or to the MacIntosh group. Intubation with either the Airtraq® or the MacIntosh laryngoscope was performed two minutes after standardised induction of anaesthesia. Arterial blood pressure, heart rate, catecholamine levels, bispectral index and duration of the intubation procedure were measured.
Results: Mean (standard deviation [95% confidence interval]) systolic arterial blood pressure at laryngoscopy with the Airtraq® laryngoscope was 124 (34 [106 to 141]) mmHg and, with the MacIntosh laryngoscope, it was 110 (25 [99 to 122]) mmHg (p=1.0). Heart rate at laryngoscopy with the Airtraq® laryngoscope was 75 beats·min-1 (16 [67 to 83]) and, with the MacIntosh laryngoscope, it was 64 beats·min-1 (14 [58 to 71]) (p=0.71). Adrenaline levels post-intubation were 54.3 ng·l-1 (41.5) [29.3 to 79.4] in the Airtraq® group and 30.5 ng·l-1 (25.6) [15.1 to 46.0] in the MacIntosh group (p=0.016). The duration of intubation with the Airtraq® laryngoscope was 88 s (31 [72-104]) while, with the MacIntosh laryngoscope, the duration was 75 s (35 [59-92]) (p=0.26).
Conclusions: The use of the Double-lumen Airtraq® laryngoscope provides no benefit regarding stress response compared to the MacIntosh laryngoscope.
Keywords: double-lumen-tube; haemodynamics; intubation; stress response.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
References
-
- Hirabayashi Y, Seo N. The Airtraq laryngoscope for placement of double-lumen endobronchial tube. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54:955–957. - PubMed
-
- Ndoko S K, Amathieu R, Tual L, Polliand C, Kamoun W, El Housseini L. et al. Tracheal intubation of morbidly obese patients: a randomized trial comparing performance of Macintosh and Airtraq laryngoscopes. Br J Anaesth 2008; 100: 263-8. Br J Anaesth. 2008;100:263–268. - PubMed
-
- Wasem S, Lazarus M, Hain J, Festl J, Kranke P, Roewer N. et al. Comparison of the Airtraq and the Macintosh laryngoscope for double-lumen tube intubation: a randomised clinical trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2013;30:180–186. - PubMed
-
- Zhang G H, Xue F S, Sun H Y, Li C W, Sun H T, Li P. et al. Comparative study of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with intubating laryngeal mask airway and direct Laryngoscope. Chin med J. 2006;11:899–904. - PubMed
-
- Nishikawa K, Matsuoka H, Saito S. Tracheal intubation with the PENTAX-AWS (Airway Scope) reduces changes of hemodynamic responses and bispectral index scores compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope. J Neurosurg Anaesthesiol. 2009;21:292–296. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous