Trial reportBMC anesthesiology2024
Efficacy and safety of video double-lumen tube intubation in lateral position in patients undergoing thoracic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC anesthesiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficiency and safety of double-lumen bronchial tube and bronchial blocker for one-lung ventilation in patients with thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Tracheal intubation in the lateral position in emergency medicine: a narrative review and clinical protocol.World journal of emergency medicine · 2025Review
- Efficacy and Risk Assessment of Lateral Position Endotracheal Intubation Combined with Airway Surface Anesthesia in Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Study.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVideo double-lumen tube (VDLT) intubation in lateral position is a potential alternative to intubation in supine position in patients undergoing thoracic surgery. This non-inferiority trial assessed the efficacy and safety of VDLT intubation in lateral position.
methodsPatients (18-70 yr) undergoing right thoracoscopic lung surgery were randomized to either the left lateral position group (group L) or the supine position group (group S). The VDLT was placed under video larygoscopy. The primary endpoint was the intubation time. Secondary endpoints included VDLT displacement rate, intubation failure rate, the satisfaction of surgeon and nurse, and intubation-related adverse events.
resultsThe analysis covered 80 patients. The total intubation time was 52.0 [20.4]s in group L and 34.3 [13.2]s in group S, with a mean difference of 17.6 s [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.9 s to 25.3 s; P = 0.050], failing to demonstrate non-inferiority with a non-inferiority margin of 10 s. Group L, compared with group S, had significantly lower VDLT displacement rate (P = 0.017) and higher nurse satisfaction (P = 0.026). No intubation failure occurred in any group. Intubation complications (P = 0.802) and surgeon satisfaction (P = 0.415) were comparable between two groups.
conclusionsThe lateral VDLT intubation took longer time than in the supine position, and non-inferiority was not achieved. The incidence of displacement as the secondary endpoint was lower in the L group, possibly due to changing body positions beforehand. The indication of lateral VDLT intubation should be based on a balance between the safety of airway management and the lower incidence of displacement.
trial registrationThe study was registered at Chictr.org.cn with the number ChiCTR2200064831 on 19/10/2022.
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.