Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35373840›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Jan Hansel, Andrew M Rogers, Sharon R Lewis, Tim M Cook, Andrew F Smith

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 121 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
121citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
32.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT06676462 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Pilot Study Comparing the HEINE visionPRO HyMac 3 and the GlideScope Hyperangulated S3 Laryngoscope Blade on Time to Intubation

TypeinterventionalSponsorLondon Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph'sRan2025 to 2027Enrolled100ConditionsIntubation, Difficult or Failed, Intubation Complication, Video LaryngoscopyArmsVideo laryngoscopy with visionPRO, Video laryngoscopy with Glidescope
NCT07223762 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Hyperangulated Versus Standard Geometry Laryngoscope Blade Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorVanderbilt University Medical CenterRan2025 to 2027Enrolled2,500ConditionsAcute Respiratory FailureArmsHyperangulated video laryngoscope blade, Standard geometry video laryngoscope blade
NCT07239141 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Estimation of the Non-Inferiority of the Laringocel® Videolaryngoscope Compared With the C-MAC D-BLADE (Karl Storz®) for First-Attempt Intubation in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorMario ZamudioRan2025 to 2026Enrolled252ConditionsAirway Management, Intubation, EndotrachealArmsLaringocel® videolaryngoscope, C-MAC® D-Blade videolaryngoscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

121 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Guideline
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

61 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jan HanselRoyal Oldham Hospital, Manchester, UK.
Andrew M RogersDepartment of Anaesthesia, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Trust, Bath, UK.
Sharon R LewisBone and Joint Health, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Tim M CookDepartment of Anaesthesia, Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Trust, Bath, UK.
Andrew F SmithDepartment of Anaesthesia, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, UK.
Royal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBRoyal Lancaster Infirmary · GBRoyal Oldham Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTracheal intubation is a common procedure performed to secure the airway in adults undergoing surgery or those who are critically ill. Intubation is sometimes associated with difficulties and complications that may result in patient harm. While it is traditionally achieved by performing direct laryngoscopy, the past three decades have seen the advent of rigid indirect videolaryngoscopes (VLs). A mounting body of evidence comparing the two approaches to tracheal intubation has been acquired over this period of time. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016.

objectivesTo assess whether use of different designs of VLs in adults requiring tracheal intubation reduces the failure rate compared with direct laryngoscopy, and assess the benefits and risks of these devices in selected population groups, users and settings. SEARCH

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and Web of Science on 27 February 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and conducted forward and backward citation searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with adults undergoing laryngoscopy performed with either a VL or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in any clinical setting. We included parallel and cross-over study designs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for the following outcomes: failed intubation, hypoxaemia, successful first attempt at tracheal intubation, oesophageal intubation, dental trauma, Cormack-Lehane grade, and time for tracheal intubation. MAIN

resultsWe included 222 studies (219 RCTs, three quasi-RCTs) with 26,149 participants undergoing tracheal intubation. Most studies recruited adults undergoing elective surgery requiring tracheal intubation. Twenty-one studies recruited participants with a known or predicted difficult airway, and an additional 25 studies simulated a difficult airway. Twenty-one studies were conducted outside the operating theatre environment; of these, six were in the prehospital setting, seven in the emergency department and eight in the intensive care unit.  We report here the findings of the three main comparisons according to videolaryngoscopy device type. We downgraded the certainty of the outcomes for imprecision, study limitations (e.g. high or unclear risks of bias), inconsistency when we noted substantial levels of statistical heterogeneity and publication bias. Macintosh-style videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (61 studies, 9883 participants) We found moderate-certainty evidence that a Macintosh-style VL probably reduces rates of failed intubation (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.65; 41 studies, 4615 participants) and hypoxaemia (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99; 16 studies, 2127 participants). These devices may also increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09; 42 studies, 7311 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably improve glottic view when assessed as Cormack-Lehane grade 3 and 4 (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.48; 38 studies, 4368 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found little or no clear difference in rates of oesophageal intubation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.21; 14 studies, 2404 participants) but this finding was supported by low-certainty evidence. We were unsure of the findings for dental trauma because the certainty of this evidence was very low (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.89; 18 studies, 2297 participants). We were not able to pool data for time required for tracheal intubation owing to considerable heterogeneity (I AUTHORS'

conclusionsVLs of all designs likely reduce rates of failed intubation and result in higher rates of successful intubation on the first attempt with improved glottic views. Macintosh-style and channelled VLs likely reduce rates of hypoxaemic events, while hyperangulated VLs probably reduce rates of oesophageal intubation. We conclude that videolaryngoscopy likely provides a safer risk profile compared to direct laryngoscopy for all adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Indexed as

LaryngoscopesLaryngoscopyAdultCritical IllnessHumansIntubation, Intratracheal

Identifiers

PMID35373840
PMCPMC8978307
OpenAlexW4223920998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.