Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2020
Ultrasound-guided versus Shikani optical stylet-aided tracheal intubation: a prospective randomized study.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2020. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Video-Assisted Intubating Stylet Technique for Difficult Intubation: A Case Series Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Use of a Video-Assisted Intubating Stylet Technique in a Critically Ill and Contagious COVID-19 Patient.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Role of Lung Ultrasound in the Management of the Critically Ill Neonate-A Narrative Review and Practical Guide.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Successful intubation with a flexible optical stylet in a patient with predictors of difficult airway using pharyngeal clearance technique with a laryngoscope: A case report.Medicine internationalArticle
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
backgroundTo compare ultrasound-guided tracheal intubation (UGTI) versus Shikani optical stylet (SOS)-aided tracheal intubation in patients with anticipated normal airway.
methodsSixty patients aged 18-65 years old who presented for elective surgery under general anesthesia were recruited in this prospective randomized study. They were assigned into two equal groups, either an ultrasound-guided group (Group UG, n = 30) or an SOS-aided group (Group SOS, n = 30). After the induction of anesthesia, the tracheal intubation was performed by a specified skilled anesthesiologist. The number of tracheal intubation attempt and the duration of successful intubation on the first attempt were recorded. Complications relative to tracheal intubation including desaturation, hoarseness and sore throat were also recorded.
resultsThe first-attempt success rate is 93.3% (28/30) in Group UG and 90% (27/30) in Group SOS (P = 0.640). The second-attempt was all successful for the 2 and 3 patients left in the two groups, and the overall success rate of both groups was 100%. The duration of successful intubation on the first attempt of Group UG was not significantly different from that of Group SOS (34.0 ± 20.8 s vs 35.5 ± 23.2 s, P = 0.784). One patient in Group SOS had desaturation (P = 0.313), and there was none hoarseness in the two groups. Sore throat was detected in both group (4 in Group UG, 5 in Group SOS, P = 0.718).
conclusionUltrasound-guided tracheal intubation was as effective as Shikani optical stylet-aided tracheal intubation in adult patients with anticipated normal airway.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IIC-17010875 . Date of Registration: 15 March 2017.
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.