Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33312030›Full record

ArticleSisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni2020

Randomized Prospective Comparison of Glidescope Video Laryngoscope with Macintosh Laryngoscope in Adult who Underwent Thyroid or Parathyroid Surgery Using Neuromonitorization.

Murat Gunes, Ayse Surhan Cinar, Mehmet Uludag

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Murat GunesDepartment of Anesthesiology Intensive Care Unit, Izmir Health Sciences University Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.
Ayse Surhan CinarDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Teaching and Resarch Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mehmet UludagDepartment of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Teaching and Resarch Hospital; Department of General Surgery, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Teaching and Resarch Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Izmir University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe present study aims to compare the effects of Glidescope Video Laryngoscope (GVL) and Machintosh Laryngoscope (ML) on the hemodynamic response, intubation time and mucosal damage in adult patients who underwent thyroid or parathyroid surgery using neuromonitorization.

methodsIn this study, 180 patients, aged between 22 and 65 classified as Class I-II in ASA

resultsPost intubation HR, DBP and MBP scores were found to be significantly higher in Group M than Group G (p=0,006, p=0.013, p=0.011). Intubation time was found to be significantly higher in Group G than in group M (35.3±10.3, 22.1±7.7 sec). There was no significant difference between the groups' number of trials and intubation-associated complications.

conclusionDespite its long intubation time, we believe that GVL may be the first choice laryngoscopy method in the thyroid or parathyroid cases that intubated with a low dose muscle relaxant for neuromonitoring since it has a slight effect than ML on hemodynamism it does not increase mucosal damage and has improved visibility.

Indexed as

Glidescope video laryngoscopemacintosh laryngoscopeneuromonitorizationparathyroid surgerythyroid surgery

Identifiers

PMID33312030
PMCPMC7729713
OpenAlexW3040618740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.