Observational studyJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2022
Predictors of difficult intubation when using a videolaryngoscope with an intermediate-angled blade during the first attempt: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03215823 (Predictive Factors of the Difficult Intubation When Using the Videolaryngoscope), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Predictive Factors of the Difficult Intubation When Using the Videolaryngoscope
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hyper-angulated (Glidescope) versus intermediate-angled (UED-A) videolaryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation in adults: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Evaluation of the Learning Curve of Endotracheal Intubation with Videolaryngoscopes: McGrathMAC, UESCOPE, and Airtraq by Young Anesthesiology Residents - Randomized, Controlled, Blinded Crossover Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
- Incidence and diagnostic validity of difficult airway in emergency departments in China: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The curvature of a videolaryngoscope blade has been diversified from the standard macintosh-type to the hyperacute-angle-type, resulting in different performances. We aimed to determine the intubation success rate and identify predictors of difficult intubation when using an intermediate-angled videolaryngoscope in the first attempt of intubation under routine anaesthesia settings. We enrolled 808 patients between 19 and 79 years of age, scheduled for elective surgeries under general anaesthesia with orotracheal intubation from July 2017 to November 2018; patients who were candidates for awake intubation were excluded. We obtained patient demographic data and performed airway evaluation before induction of anaesthesia for elective surgeries. We used the UEScope for tracheal intubation with a hockey stick-shaped malleable stylet. The intubation time was defined as the total duration from the entry of the blade into the oropharynx to the detection of first end-tidal carbon dioxide capnogram; this duration was recorded along with the number of intubation attempts. Difficult intubation was defined as either > 60 s duration for tracheal intubation, or > 1 intubation attempt. The use of the UEScope demonstrated a 99.4% success rate for intubation; however, increased difficulties were observed in patients who were male, obese, had a short thyromental distance, limited mouth opening, and high upper-lip-bite test class. Despite the high intubation success rate using an intermediate-angled videolaryngoscope, we recommend preparing backup plans, considering the increased difficulty in patients with certain preoperative features.Clinical trial number and registry URL: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT03215823 (Date of registration: 12 July).
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.