Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30832590›Full record

Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2019

The Clarus Video System (Trachway) and direct laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation with cricoid pressure in simulated rapid sequence induction intubation: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Yen-Chu Lin, An-Hsun Cho, Jr-Rung Lin, Yung-Tai Chung

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03841890 (The Clarus Video System), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

NCT03841890 nacompletednot on this map

The Clarus Video System (Trachway) and Direct Laryngoscope for Endotracheal Intubation With Cricoid Pressure in Simulated Rapid Sequence Induction Intubation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorChang Gung Memorial HospitalRan2016 to 2018Enrolled150ConditionsIntubation, Intratracheal, Laryngoscopes, Anesthesia, GeneralArmsthe Clarus Video System as a video stylet, the Clarus Video System as a lightwand, direct laryngoscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yen-Chu LinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No.5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist., Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
An-Hsun ChoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No.5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist., Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Jr-Rung LinDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No.5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist., Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan.
Yung-Tai ChungDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No.5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist., Taoyuan City, 333, Taiwan. oj8600chung@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-0374-0923
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital · TWChang Gung University · TWChang Gung University of Science and Technology · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring an emergency endotracheal intubation, rapid sequence induction intubation (RSII) with cricoid pressure (CP) is frequently implemented to prevent aspiration pneumonia. We evaluated the CVS in endotracheal intubation in RSII with CP, in comparison with a direct laryngoscope (DL).

methodsOne hundred fifty patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: the CVS as a video stylet (CVS-V) group, the CVS as a lightwand (CVS-L) group and DL group. Primary outcomes were to assess the power of the CVS, compared with DL, regarding the first attempt success rate and intubation time in simulated RSII with CP. Secondary outcomes were to examine hemodynamic stress response and the incidence of complications.

resultsThe first attempt success rates within 30 s and within 60 s were higher in CVS-V and DL group than those in CVS-L group (p = 0.006 and 0.037, respectively). The intergroup difference for intubation success rate within 30 s was nonsignificant and almost all the patients were successfully intubated within 60 s (98% for CVS-L and DL group, 96% for CVS-L group). Kaplan-Meier estimator demonstrated the median intubation time was 10.6 s [95% CI, 7.5 to 13.7] in CVS-V group, 14.6 s [95% CI, 11.1 to 18.0] in CVS-L group and 16.5 s [95% CI, 15.7 to 17.3] in DL group (p = 0.023 by the log-rank test). However, the difference was nonsignificant after Sidak's adjustment. The intergroup differences for hemodynamic stress response, sore throat and mucosa injury incidence were also nonsignificant.

conclusionsThe CVS-D and DL provide a higher first attempt intubation success rate within 30 and 60 s in intubation with CP; the intubation time for the CVS-V was nonsignificantly shorter than that for the other two intubation methods. Almost all the patients can be successfully intubated with any of the three intubation methods within 60 s.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03841890 , registered on February 15, 2019 (retrospectively registered).

Indexed as

LaryngoscopesAdultCricoid CartilageFemaleHumansIntubation, IntratrachealLaryngoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPneumonia, AspirationPressureProspective StudiesRapid Sequence Induction and IntubationTime FactorsVideo RecordingCricoid pressureDirect laryngoscopeRapid sequence induction intubationThe Clarus Video System

Identifiers

PMID30832590
PMCPMC6399974
OpenAlexW2931498573

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.