Observational studyIntensive care medicine2022
Impact of Macintosh blade size on endotracheal intubation success in intensive care units: a retrospective multicenter observational MacSize-ICU study.
Observational study in Intensive care medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06232837 (Macintosh Blade Size During Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation in Operative Rooms. A Nationwide Prospective Observational Study.), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Macintosh Blade Size During Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation in Operative Rooms. A Nationwide Prospective Observational Study.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Influence of Curved Video Laryngoscope Blade Sizes and Patient Heights on Video Laryngoscopic Views: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Effect of Blade Size on the First-Pass Success Rate of Endotracheal Intubation Using the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Effect of Laryngoscope Blade Size on First Pass Success of Tracheal Intubation in Critically Ill Adults.Critical care explorations · 2023Article
- Size does matter.Intensive care medicine · 2023Article
- Analgesia as part of the orotracheal intubation induction sequence. Author's reply.Intensive care medicine · 2022Article
- Machines that save lives in intensive care: why a special issue in ICM?Intensive care medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the impact of Macintosh blade size used during direct laryngoscopy (DL) on first-attempt intubation success of orotracheal intubation in French intensive care units (ICUs). We hypothesized that success rate would be higher with Macintosh blade size No3 than with No4.
methodsMulticenter retrospective observational study based on data from prospective trials conducted in 48 French ICUs of university, and general and private hospitals. After each intubation using Macintosh DL, patients' and operators' characteristics, Macintosh blade size, results of first DL and alternative techniques used, as well as the need of a second operator were collected. Complications rates associated with intubation were investigated. Primary outcome was success rate of first DL using Macintosh blade.
resultsA total of 2139 intubations were collected, 629 with a Macintosh blade No3 and 1510 with a No4. Incidence of first-pass intubation after first DL was significantly higher with Macintosh blade No3 (79.5 vs 73.3%, p = 0.0025), despite equivalent Cormack-Lehane scores (p = 0.48). Complications rates were equivalent between groups. Multivariate analysis concluded to a significant impact of Macintosh blade size on first DL success in favor of blade No3 (OR 1.44 [95% CI 1.14-1.84]; p = 0.0025) without any significant center effect on the primary outcome (p = 0.18). Propensity scores and adjustment analyses concluded to equivalent results.
conclusionIn the present study, Macintosh blade No3 was associated with improved first-passed DL in French ICUs. However, study design requires the conduct of a nationwide prospective multicenter randomized trial in different settings to confirm these results.
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.