Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33162600›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2020

A randomised comparative study of "videoendoscope" with the Truview EVO2, C-MAC D blade videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope.

Ameya Pappu, Bimla Sharma, Rashmi Jain, Naresh Dua, Jayashree Sood

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Comparison of the Efficacy of Macintosh Laryngoscope Versus Airtraq Videolaryngoscope for Visualization of Laryngeal Structures at the End of Thyroidectomy: A Randomized Control Study.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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.

Ameya PappuDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Bimla SharmaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Rashmi JainDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Naresh DuaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Jayashree SoodDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Perioperative Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Sir Ganga Ram Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsVideolaryngoscopes are crucial components of a difficult airway cart. Issues of cost and availability, however, remain a problem. We compared the combination of an endoscope used in conjunction with the Macintosh laryngoscope with established videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope using the intubation difficulty scale (IDS) score. MATERIALS AND

methodsA prospective randomised study including 120 adult patients, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III, with an anticipated difficult airway scheduled for elective surgery were randomly allocated to one of four groups: Truview EVO2 (group 1), C-MAC D Blade (group 2), videoendoscope (group 3), or Macintosh laryngoscope (group 4). The IDS score was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Cormack-Lehane grade, time to tracheal intubation, haemodynamic responses, and adverse events.

resultsA significant proportion of patients in groups 2 and 3 had an IDS score of zero (73.3 and 70%, respectively). IDS scores were significantly lower in the C-MAC D blade and videoendoscope groups attributable to differences in parameters N4, N5 and N6 [C/L grades, lifting force and laryngeal pressure required] (

conclusionThe performance of videoendoscope was comparable to C-MAC D Blade and superior to Truview EVO2 and Macintosh laryngoscope with respect to the IDS score and may thereby provide an effective alternative to commercial videolaryngoscopes in low resource settings.

Indexed as

Anaesthesiaendoscopeintubationlaryngoscopyvideolaryngoscope

Identifiers

PMID33162600
PMCPMC7641055
OpenAlexW3049578118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.