ReviewDie Anaesthesiologie2025
[Value of video laryngoscopy as universal primary intubation technique for anesthesiological practice : Narrative review].
Review in Die Anaesthesiologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Video laryngoscopy as a teaching tool in direct intubation in undergraduate medical education - a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to data from the World Health Organization (WHO), approximately 300 million surgical procedures are performed worldwide each year. The majority of these procedures are conducted with the patient under general anesthesia, with endotracheal intubation used to secure the airway in more than half of the cases. Complications during airway management can lead to serious adverse events and significantly contribute to perioperative morbidity and sometimes even mortality.Over the past 25 years, the increasing use of video laryngoscopes in clinical practice has led to substantial advancements in the management of difficult airways. This has resulted in a marked reduction in potentially severe complications, establishing video laryngoscopes as an indispensable tool in modern anesthesia practice; however, a critical question remains: why has video laryngoscopy become the standard approach for anticipated and unanticipated difficult airways but is not (yet) routinely employed as the primary method for all intubations?Both meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials have confirmed the superiority of video laryngoscopy in airway management across various patient populations and clinical scenarios. Video laryngoscopy improves the first attempt success rate of intubation, while simultaneously reducing the total number of intubation attempts, the incidence of airway injuries and the rate of failed intubations. Consequently, in alignment with the current German S1 guidelines on airway management, the adoption of video laryngoscopy as a potential standard technique for all intubations is recommended.The benefits of video laryngoscopy clearly outweigh the arguments against its universal application. It should therefore be adopted as the primary intubation technique in order to enhance patient safety and improve the overall quality of airway management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40676269What 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.