ArticleBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)2026
GlideRite® rigid stylet vs Flex-it® articulated stylet for intubation with videolaryngoscopy in patients with semi-rigid cervical collar: a randomized trial.
Article in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier), 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCompared with the GlideRite® rigid stylet used with the GlideScope® hyperangulated blade, the Flex-it® stylet permits dynamic orientation of the tracheal tube toward the glottis. This randomized trial compared GlideRite and Flex-it stylets regarding GlideScope intubation duration in patients wearing a semi-rigid cervical collar, simulating conditions of cervical instability.
methodsEighty adult patients undergoing elective surgery were randomized to tracheal intubation using the GlideScope with either the GlideRite or the Flex-it stylet. A semi-rigid cervical collar was applied following anesthesia induction. The primary endpoint was intubation duration in seconds. For our modified Intention-To-Treat (mITT) analysis, failed intubations were assigned the maximum duration of 180 seconds. Secondary outcomes included tracheal tube handling duration, intubation failure, Intubation Difficulty Scale, and ease of stylet removal.
resultsSeventy-five patients were included in the mITT analysis (n = 38 for Flex-it, 37 for GlideRite). Intubation duration was longer when using Flex-it compared with GlideRite (median [IQR]: 88 [65‒180] vs. 49 [39‒61] s) with a median difference of 37 s (95% CI: 22 to 64; p < 0.0001). Tube handling duration was longer with Flex-it (median [IQR]: 48 [33‒66] vs. 34 [25‒39] s; p = 0.007). Failure rate was significantly higher with Flex-it (15/38, 39.5%) than with GlideRite (2/37, 5.4%; p < 0.001). Intubation Difficulty Scale score was higher for Flex-it (median [IQR]: 6 [5‒7] vs. 2 [2‒5]; p < 0.001).
conclusionIn elective patients with simulated cervical instability, videolaryngoscopy with the Flex-it stylet resulted in longer intubation, greater difficulty, and higher failure rate compared with the GlideRite stylet.
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.