Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29924038›Full record

Trial reportMedicine2018

Supraglottic airway device versus a channeled or non-channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope for accidental extubation in the prone position: A randomized crossover manikin study.

Hiroyuki Oshika, Yukihide Koyama, Masataka Taguri, Koichi Maruyama, Go Hirabayashi, Shoko Merrit Yamada, Masashi Kohno, Tomio Andoh

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 'Sealing the deal': An innovative use of the endotracheal cuff manometer.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hiroyuki OshikaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Mizonokuchi Hospital, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Kawasaki Department of Biostatics, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama Department of Neurosurgery, Mizonokuchi Hospital, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Kawasaki Department of Anesthesia, Tomei Atsugi Hospital, Atsugi, Japan.
Yukihide Koyama
Masataka Taguri
Koichi Maruyama
Go Hirabayashi
Shoko Merrit Yamada
Masashi Kohno
Tomio Andoh
Teikyo University · JPTsurugi Hospital · JPYokohama City University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is very rare but challenging to perform emergency airway management for accidental extubation in a patient whose head and neck are fixed in the prone position when urgently turning the patient to the supine position would be unsafe. The authors hypothesized that tracheal intubation with a videolaryngoscope would allow effective airway rescue in this situation compared with a supraglottic airway device and designed a randomized crossover manikin study to test this hypothesis.

methodsThe authors compared airway rescue performances of the 3 devices-the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA; Teleflex Medical, Westmeath, Ireland) as a reference; the Pentax AWS (AWS; Nihon Kohden, Tokyo, Japan) as a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope; and the McGRATH videolaryngoscope (McGRATH; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) as a nonchanneled blade type in a manikin fixed to the operating table in the prone position. Twenty-one anesthesiologists performed airway management on the prone manikin with the 3 devices, and the time required for intubation/ventilation and the success rates were recorded.

resultsThe median (range) intubation/ventilation times with the PLMA, AWS, and McGRATH were 24.5 (13.5-89.5) s, 29.9 (17.1-79.8) s, and 46.7 (21.9-211.7) s, respectively. There was no significant difference in intubation/ventilation times between the PLMA and AWS. The AWS permitted significantly faster tracheal intubation than did the McGRATH (P = 0.006). The success rates with the PLMA (100%) and AWS (100%) were significantly greater than that with the McGRATH (71.4%). Airway management performance of the PLMA and AWS was comparable between devices and better than that of the McGRATH in the prone position.

conclusionsConsidering that tracheal intubation can provide a more secure airway and more stable ventilation than the PLMA, re-intubation with a channeled blade-type videolaryngoscope such as the AWS may be a useful method of airway rescue for accidental extubation in patients in the prone position.

Indexed as

Airway ExtubationAirway ManagementAnesthesiologyClinical CompetenceHumansIntubation, IntratrachealLaryngeal MasksLaryngoscopesLaryngoscopyManikinsProne PositionTime FactorsVentilation

Identifiers

PMID29924038
PMCPMC6023683
OpenAlexW2808944816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.