Intubation of the morbidly obese patient: GlideScope^® vs. Fastrach™

Abstract

No significant difference between the two methods was found. The GS and the FT may therefore be considered to be equally good when intubating morbidly obese patients.

Choice of anaesthesia for category‐1 caesarean section in women with anticipated difficult tracheal intubation: the use of decision analysis

“…Bathory (2010) [30] Andersen (2011) [31] Abdelmalak (2011) [32] Ydemann (2012) [33] Marrel (2007) [34] Dhonneur (2009) [35] Summary success rate (tab) 94.4% Study Bathory (2010) [30] Andersen (2011) [31] Abdelmalak (2011) [32] Ydemann (2012) [33] Marrel (2007) [34] Dhonneur (2009)…”

The obstetric difficult airway: if we can't predict it, can we prevent it?

“…Summarising all patients in these studies, and accepting an additional attempt at videolaryngoscopy as a success, the success rate of videolaryngoscopy in obese patients has a 95% CI of 0.99 – 1.00 (Fig. ) . Specific for obstetric anaesthesia, limited evidence from a series of 180 intubations for emergency or urgent caesarean section shows that the use of videolaryngoscopy ensured successful intubation at the first attempt in all 18 patients in which it was used as the primary device.…”

King Vision vs. Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (ILMA) For Intubation of Obese Patients

“…The differences in the results between the two devices may be due to different shape, structure, and method of intubation. Arslan ZI et al [5] Ydemann M et al [10] compared Glidescope and ILMA (Fastrach) for intubation of patients suffering from morbid obesity and concluded that ILMA group showed that intubation time was 61 s, 84% of participants (n=42) were intubated in the 1st attempt, 5 patients (10%) could not be intubated in the second attempt and no desaturation occurred.…”