SynthesisFrontiers in pediatrics2025
Video vs. direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in neonates: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to synthesize data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness and safety of videolaryngoscopy vs. direct laryngoscopy in neonates undergoing endotracheal intubation. Methods: This meta-analysis was conducted on June 1, 2024, in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL EbscoHost databases to identify relevant trials. Primary outcome was the success rate of intubation on the first attempt. Secondary outcomes included the time required for successful intubation, number of intubation attempts, adverse events related to both non-airway and airway complications. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to rule out the possibility of false positive result. Results: Nine RCTs involving 1,059 neonates were included. Videolaryngoscopy significantly improved the success rate of first-attempt intubation [risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 1.06-1.38], TSA confirmed these findings. Subgroup analyses indicated that videolaryngoscopy was particularly beneficial for inexperienced clinicians or when used in the neonatal intensive care unit. However, videolaryngoscopy did not significantly reduce the number of intubation attempts [mean difference (MD) -0.22, 95% CI -0.44-0.01] and had a similar time to successful intubation as direct laryngoscopy (MD 0.91, 95% CI -0.32-2.14). Videolaryngoscopy was associated with less airway trauma (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.89). Additionally, videolaryngoscopy showed minimal differences in the occurrence of bradycardia, desaturation, or low oxygen saturation levels during intubation. Conclusion: The current evidence suggested that videolaryngoscopy enhanced the success rate of first-attempt intubation and reduced airway trauma, while requiring a similar time required for successful intubation compared to direct laryngoscopy. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024552392, PROSPERO CRD42024552392.
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.