SynthesisPloS one2020
Different classes of videoscopes and direct laryngoscopes for double-lumen tube intubation in thoracic surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Video Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-lumen Tube Tracheal Intubation in Thoracic Surgery
Comparison Between C-MAC Blade D Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Double Lumen Tube Insertion in Patients Undergoing Elective Thoracic Surgeries
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of direct and indirect images and hemodynamic response of two different video laryngoscopes to tracheal intubation.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Beyond the default use of videolaryngoscopy: next steps?Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
- Videolaryngoscopy for all: A global proposal for safer airway management.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Pre-shaping double-lumen endotracheal tubes based on video laryngoscope blade curvature enhances first-attempt intubation success rate in patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Endotracheal Intubation of Difficult Airways in Emergency Settings: A Guide for Innovators.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Review
- Role of Lung Ultrasound in Confirmation of Double Lumen Endotracheal Tube Placement for Thoracic Surgeries: A Prospective Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2022Article
- Comparisons of Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation Undergoing General Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Recent Advances in Videolaryngoscopy for One-Lung Ventilation in Thoracic Anesthesia: A Narrative Review.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Video-Laryngoscopy versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-Lumen Endotracheal Intubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- A Randomised Control Study Comparing C-MAC D-Blade Video Laryngoscope (Hyper Angulated Blade) and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Insertion of a Double-Lumen Tube in Patients Undergoing Elective Thoracotomy.Anesthesia, essays and researchesArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDouble-lumen tube is commonly used in thoracic surgeries that need one-lung ventilation, but its big size and stiff structure make it harder to perform intubation than a conventional tracheal intubation tube.
objectivesTo investigate the effectiveness and safety of videoscopes for double-lumen tube insertion. The primary outcome was the success rate of first attempt intubation. Secondary outcomes were intubation time, malposition, oral mucosal damage, sore throat, and external manipulation.
designSystematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Databases (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, Kmbase, Web of science, Scopus) up to June 23, 2020 were searched. ELIGIBILITY: Randomized controlled trials comparing different videoscopes for double-lumen tube intubation were included in this study.
methodsWe classified and lumped the videoscope devices into the following groups: standard (non-channeled) videolaryngoscope, channeled videolaryngoscope, videostylet, and direct laryngoscope. After assessing the quality of evidence, we statistically analyzed and chose the best device based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) by using STATA software (version 16).
resultsWe included 23 studies (2012 patients). Based on the success rate of the first attempt, a rankogram suggested that the standard videolaryngoscope (76.4 of SUCRA) was the best choice, followed by videostylet (65.5), channeled videolaryngoscope (36.1), and direct laryngoscope (22.1), respectively. However, with regard to reducing the intubation time, the best choice was videostylet, followed by a direct laryngoscope, channeled videolaryngoscope, and standard videolaryngoscope, respectively. Direct laryngoscope showed the lowest incidence of malposition but required external manipulation the most. Channeled videolaryngoscope showed the highest incidence of oral mucosal damage, but showed the lower incidence of sore throat than standard videolaryngoscope or direct laryngoscope.
conclusionMost videoscopes improved the success rate of double-lumen tube intubation; however, they were time-consuming (except videostylet) and had a higher malposition rate than the direct laryngoscope.
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.