ArticleBMJ open2021
Anaesthesia protocol evaluation of the videolaryngoscopy with the McGrath MAC and direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in 1000 patients undergoing rapid sequence induction: the randomised multicentre LARA trial study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04794764 (Evaluation of Videolaryngoscopy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Evaluation of Videolaryngoscopy (McGrath Mac) Compared to Direct Laryngoscopy for Rapid Sequence Intubation in Operating Room
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRapid sequence induction of anaesthesia is indicated in patients with an increased risk of pulmonary aspiration. The main objective of the technique is to reduce the critical time period between loss of airway protective reflexes and rapid inflation of the cuff of the endotracheal tube to minimise the chance of aspiration of gastric contents. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the importance of first-pass intubation success to ensure patient and healthcare worker safety. The aim of this study is to compare the first-pass intubation success rate (FPS) using the videolaryngoscopy compared with conventional direct laryngoscopy in surgical patients with a high risk of pulmonary aspiration. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The LARA trial is a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Consecutive patients requiring tracheal intubation are randomly allocated to either the McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope or direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The expected rate of FPS is 92% in the McGrath group and 82% in the Macintosh group. Each group must include a total of 500 patients to achieve 90% power for detecting a difference at the 5% significance level. Successful intubation with the FPS is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints are the time to intubation, the number of intubation attempts, the necessity of airway management alternatives, the visualisation of the glottis using the Cormack and Lehane Score and the Percentage Of Glottic Opening Score and definite adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project is approved by the local ethics committee of the Medical Association of the Rhineland Palatine state (registration number: 2020-15502) and medical ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (registration number: 21-1303). The results of this study will be made available in form of manuscripts for publication and presentations at national and international meetings.
trial registrationNCT04794764.
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.