Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2019
Comparative evaluation of Airtraq™ and GlideScope® videolaryngoscopes for difficult pediatric intubation in a Pierre Robin manikin.
Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Development of a low-cost congenital abdominal wall defect simulator (wall-go) for undergraduate medical education: a validation study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Clinically Preferred Videolaryngoscopes in Airway Management: An Updated Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Difficult Airway Management in Neonates and Infants: Knowledge of Devices and a Device-Oriented Strategy.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Airway management in children is associated with anatomical and physiological challenges compared with adults. Pierre Robin sequence (PRS) is a condition characterized by micrognathia, glossoptosis, and cleft palate and related to a difficult airway. Both the Airtraq™ and GlideScope® have never been previously directly compared in PRS. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of these two airway devices in a PRS manikin for ethical and practical reasons. Between April and July 2017, 26, pediatric intensive care clinical fellows or trainees from a tertiary pediatric center were recruited to participate. In this prospective and randomized crossover trial, all participants first set up the Airtraq™ and the GlideScope® and then used these videolaryngoscopes to intubate an AirSim® PRS manikin. Our primary outcome measure was the duration of the successful intubation attempt. Duration of the successful intubation attempt was 18.1 (14.2-34.9 [10.2-51.3]) s for the Airtraq™ compared to 31.1 (18.7-55.6 [6.2-119]) s for the GlideScope® (p = 0.045). Setup time was 50.0 ± 6.9 s for the Airtraq™ and 27.8 ± 8.6 s for the GlideScope® (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Even though setup time was longer, the characteristics of intubation performance were superior with the Airtraq™ relative to the GlideScope® in an AirSim® PRS manikin. What is Known: • Several case reports have described the successful use of Airtraq™ to intubate children with Pierre Robin sequence. • The GlideScope® has demonstrated similar rates of first-attempt successful intubation to flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy in a Pierre Robin sequence manikin. What is New: • In the hands of pediatric non-airway specialists, the characteristics of intubation performance, including the duration of the successful intubation attempt, are superior with the Airtraq™ compared with the GlideScope® in a Pierre Robin sequence manikin. • Setup time for the Airtraq™ is, however, longer relative to that for the GlideScope®.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.