Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30410341›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2018

Videolaryngoscopy versus fiberoptic bronchoscope for awake intubation - a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Jia Jiang, Da-Xu Ma, Bo Li, An-Shi Wu, Fu-Shan Xue

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparison of SEEKBMC anesthesiology · 2025
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Anesthesia for oral surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jia JiangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China.
Da-Xu MaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China.
Bo LiBeijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100010, China.
An-Shi WuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China.
Fu-Shan XueDepartment of Anesthesiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China, xuefushan@aliyun.com.
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAwake intubation with videolaryngoscopy (VL) is a novel method that is drawing more and more attention as an alternative to awake intubation with fiberoptic bronchoscope (FOB). This meta-analysis is designed to determine the performance of VL compared to the FOB for awake intubation.

methodsThe Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, and Web of science were searched from database inception until October 30, 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing VL and FOB for awake intubation were selected. The primary outcome was the overall success rate. Rev-Man 5.3 software was used to perform the pooled analysis and assess the risk of bias for each eligible study. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence for all outcomes.

resultsSix studies (446 patients) were included in the review for data extraction. Pooled analysis did not show any difference in the overall success rate by using VL and FOB (relative risk [RR], 1.00;

conclusionFor awake intubation, VL with a shorter intubation time is as effective and safe as FOB. VL may be a useful alternative to FOB.

Indexed as

airway managementawake intubationfiberoptic bronchoscopyoutcomesrandomized controlled clinical trialsvideolaryngoscopy

Identifiers

PMID30410341
PMCPMC6197207
OpenAlexW2896883758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.