The aim of the present paper is to review the literature regarding video-laryngoscopes (Storz V-Mac and C-Mac, Glidescope, McGrath, Pentax-Airway Scope, Airtraq and Bullard) and discuss their clinical role in airway management. Video-laryngoscopes are new intubation devices, which provide an indirect view of the upper airway. In difficult airway management, they improve Cormack-Lehane grade and achieve the same or a higher intubation success rate in less time, compared with direct laryngoscopes. Despite the very good visualization of the glottis, the insertion and advancement of the endotracheal tube with video-laryngoscopes may occasionally fail. Each particular device's features may offer advantages or disadvantages, depending on the situation the anaesthesiologist has to deal with. So far, there is inconclusive evidence indicating that video-laryngoscopy should replace direct laryngoscopy in patients with normal or difficult airways.

No abstract

Nasal high flow is a promising novel oxygen delivery device, whose mechanisms of action offer some beneficial effects over conventional oxygen systems. The administration of a high flow of heated and humidified gas mixture promotes higher and more stable inspiratory oxygen fraction values, decreases anatomical dead space and generates a positive airway pressure that can reduce the work of breathing and enhance patient comfort and tolerance. Nasal high flow has been used as a prophylactic tool or as a treatment device mostly in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, with the majority of studies showing positive results. Recently, its clinical indications have been expanded to post-extubated patients in intensive care or following surgery, for pre-and peri-oxygenation during intubation, during bronchoscopy, in immunocompromised patients and in patients with "do not intubate" status. In the present review, we differentiate studies that suggest an advantage (benefit) from other studies that do not suggest an advantage (no benefit) compared to conventional oxygen devices or noninvasive ventilation, and propose an algorithm in cases of nasal high flow application in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure of almost any cause.

Graduating from a four-year educational programme helps nurses identify emergencies. However, irrespective of the educational programme they have followed, undertaking a basic life support or advanced life support provider course is critical as it helps them identify cardiac or respiratory emergencies.

RationaleIn patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and mild hypoxaemia, the clinical benefit of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) remains unclear. We aimed to examine whether HFNO compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) could prevent escalation of respiratory support in this patient population.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤92% who required oxygen therapy were randomised to HFNO or COT. The primary outcome was the rate of escalation of respiratory support (ie, continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation) within 28 days. Among secondary outcomes, clinical recovery was defined as the improvement in oxygenation (SpO2 ≥96% with fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) ≤30% or partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide/FiO2 ratio >300 mm Hg).ResultsAmong 364 randomised patients, 55 (30.3%) of 181 patients assigned to HFNO and 70 (38.6%) of 181 patients assigned to COT underwent escalation of respiratory support, with no significant difference between groups (absolute risk difference −8.2% (95% CI −18% to +1.4%); RR 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.05); p=0.09). There was no significant difference in clinical recovery (69.1% vs 60.8%; absolute risk difference 8.2% (95% CI −1.5% to +18.0%), RR 1.14 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.32)), intensive care unit admission (7.7% vs 11.0%, absolute risk difference −3.3% (95% CI −9.3% to +2.6%)), and in hospital length of stay (11 (IQR 8–17) vs 11 (IQR 7–20) days, absolute risk difference −1.0% (95% CI −3.1% to +1.1%)).ConclusionsAmong patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and mild hypoxaemia, the use of HFNO did not significantly reduce the likelihood of escalation of respiratory support.Trial registration numberNCT04655638.

Although high quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation is one of the most significant factors related to favourable outcome, its quality depends on many components, such as airway management, compression depth and chest recoil, hands-off time, and early defibrillation. The most common way of controlling the resuscitation efforts is monitoring of end-tidal carbon dioxide. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation suggests this method both for in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, despite the abundant human and animal studies supporting the usefulness of end-tidal carbon dioxide, its optimal values during cardiopulmonary resuscitation remain controversial. In this review, the advantages and effectiveness of end-tidal carbon dioxide during cardiopulmonary resuscitation are discussed and specific target values are suggested based on the available literature.

No abstract

In this manikin setting i-gel significantly improved success rates and insertion time compared with cLMA. Most importantly, i-gel use resulted in high first pass success rates for novice doctors, equal to those achieved by experienced doctors.