Trial reportKorean journal of anesthesiology2023
Usefulness of C-curved stylet for intubation with the C-MAC® Miller videolaryngoscope in neonates and infants: a prospective randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to improve neonatal and infant intubation success: a meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- The C-MAC video laryngoscope helps presbyopic anesthetists to overcome difficulty in neonatal and infantile intubation: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Appropriate shape of a stylet for tracheal intubation using the McGrath® MAC videolaryngoscope in neonates: a randomized crossover simulation study.JA clinical reports · 2025Article
- Response to "Comment on Usefulness of C-curved stylet for intubation with the C-MAC® Miller videolaryngoscope in neonates and infants: a prospective randomized controlled trial".Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2024Article
- Comment on "Usefulness of C-curved stylet for intubation with the C-MAC® Miller videolaryngoscope in neonates and infants: a prospective randomized controlled trial".Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOptimizing endotracheal tube (ETT) shape is important for successful videolaryngoscope-aided intubation. This prospective randomized controlled study aimed to compare the tube-handling time between a C-curved and hockey stick-shaped stylet in infants and neonates using the C-MAC® videolaryngoscope Miller blade.
methodsA total of 110 infants (age < 1 year) were randomly assigned to either the hockey stick-curved stylet group (group H, n = 53) or the C-curved stylet group (group C, n = 57). The primary outcome was tube handling time after glottis visualization and the secondary outcomes were the total intubation time, incidence of successful intubation, initial tube tip location at the laryngeal inlet, and numerical rating scale for ease of intubation.
resultsTube insertion time and total intubation duration (both in seconds) were significantly shorter in group C than in group H (13.3 ± 8.9 vs. 25.1 ± 27.0, P = 0.002; 19.9 ± 9.4 vs. 32.8 ± 27.1, P = 0.001, respectively). Group C displayed a higher rate of intubation success within 30 s than group H (87.7% vs. 69.8%, P = 0.029). The initial tube tip was located at the center in 34 children in group C (59.6%) and 12 children in group H (26.1%, P < 0.001). Laryngoscope operators rated intubation as easier when provided with a C-curved stylet.
conclusionsIn neonates and infants, modification of the ETT shape into a C-curve may reduce tube handling time compared to the conventional hockey stick-shaped tube during intubation using a C-MAC® video laryngoscope Miller blade.
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.