ArticleCureus2025
Contact of Teeth With Blades of Macintosh Laryngoscope, McGrath MAC® Video Laryngoscope, and Pentax-AWS Airway Scope® During Tracheal Intubation: A Randomized Crossover Simulation Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Dental injury is a common complication during laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation. Due to the variety of laryngoscopes, the site of tooth contact with the laryngoscope blade might vary. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in contact status of each individual tooth and various laryngoscope blades during orotracheal intubation, evaluated using a simulation study. Methods Fifteen anesthesiologists randomly attempted orotracheal intubation in two types of simulators (models A and B) using a Macintosh laryngoscope with #3 blade (ML) (Riester, Jungingen, Germany), McGrath MAC® video laryngoscope with #3 blade (MAC) (Medtronic, Covidien, Tokyo, Japan), and Pentax-AWS Airway Scope® with SL blade (AWS) (Nihon Koden, Tokyo, Japan), with colored articulating papers attached to the front and back of their blades. Following the procedure, the teeth of the simulators were examined for color transference, and the findings were recorded. Result The mean number (standard deviation) of contacted teeth per intubation maneuver when using the ML, MAC, and AWS were 4.3 (1.8), 3.9 (1.5), and 12.9 (2.7) in model A and 4.2 (2.3), 3.7 (1.3), and 13.2 (2.5) in model B. In both models, higher contact rates were seen for the left maxillary central incisor (>80%) and left mandibular central incisor (>60%), with no contact with the molars when using the ML and MAC. Use of the AWS resulted in higher contact rates with the central and lateral incisors bilaterally, both maxillary and mandibular (>80%), with bilateral maxillary premolars sometimes contacting the blade (>20%). Conclusion This simulation study suggested that during tracheal intubation using ML, MAC, and AWS, both the mandibular incisors and maxillary incisors may frequently come into contact with the laryngoscope blade. In addition, when using the AWS, more teeth come into contact with the blade compared to other laryngoscopes, and there is also the possibility of contact with the molars.
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.