Observational studyAnaesthesia2026
Artificial intelligence-assisted tracheal intubation in humans: a prospective observational study of diagnostic accuracy.
Observational study in Anaesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective Evaluation of an Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Video Laryngoscope System for Tracheal Intubation in Infants and Neonates.Paediatric anaesthesia · 2026Article
- The evolving landscape of airway education in anesthesia for head and neck surgery.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionlarynGuide™ is a novel assistive software integrated with the C-MAC
methodsThis prospective, single-centre, investigator-initiated, observational study included adult patients undergoing elective surgery requiring general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation. After informed consent and standardised induction of anaesthesia, laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were performed with a C-MAC
resultsWe enrolled 132 patients, of whom 110 were analysed. Of 108 patients with correctly placed tracheal tubes, larynGuide identified 102 (sensitivity 0.94, 95%CI 0.88-0.98). In six patients, the software misclassified tracheal tube position: two false negatives (i.e. the software advised a failed tracheal intubation despite correct placement); and four patients with no feedback. Among two patients with unsuccessful tracheal intubation due to oesophageal tube placement at the first attempt, larynGuide detected one. DISCUSSION: This first in-human study has established the feasibility of AI-guided real-time tracheal intubation using larynGuide. The software showed promising sensitivity, while specificity was limited. Videolaryngoscopy image quality issues, including fogging and poor visibility, impaired the performance of the software.
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.