Pentax Airway Scope<sup>®</sup> vs Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Hoshijima, Hiroshi; Kuratani, Norifumi; Hirabayashi, Yoshihiro; Takeuchi, Risa; Shiga, Toshiya; Masaki, Eiji

doi:10.1111/anae.12705

Cited by 38 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are consistent with previous studies based on adult population. 16,17 Meta-analysis in adult patients reported that Pentax AWS provided a superior glottis view compared to Macintosh laryngoscopy, yet showed no difference in terms of intubation time, success rate at first attempt and oropharyngeal injury incidence. 16 In another meta-analysis done by Hirabayashi et al, 17 channelled…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Kwak

Kim

et al. 2019

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Funding informationDepartmental source. Background: Pentax Airway Scope (AWS) is a recently developed videolaryngoscopefor use in both normal and difficult airways, yet its use in paediatric patients has not been established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Pentax AWS regarding intubation time, laryngeal view and ease of intubation in paediatric patients with normal airway, compared to Macintosh laryngoscope.Method: A total of 136 paediatric patients aged 1-10 with American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I or II undergoing general anaesthesia were randomly allocated into two groups: Macintosh laryngoscope (n = 68) and Pentax Airway Scope (n = 68). Primary outcome was intubation time. Cormack-Lehane laryngeal view grade, application of optimal laryngeal external manipulation, intubation difficulty scale, intubation failure rate and adverse events were also measured.Result: No significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding intubation time (P = 0.713). As for the laryngeal view grade, the Pentax group resulted in lower graded cases compared to the Macintosh group (P = 0.000). No optimal laryngeal external manipulation application was required in the Pentax group.Intubation difficulty scale resulted in lower values for Pentax group (P = 0.001).Failure rate was not different between the two groups (P = 0.619). There were significantly more teeth injury cases in the Pentax group than Macintosh group (P = 0.042).Conclusion: Pentax Airway Scope provided similar intubation time and success rate, while improving laryngeal view, compared to Macintosh laryngoscopy in children with normal airway. When using Pentax AWS in children, however, the risk of teeth injury may increase.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Kwak

Kim

et al. 2019

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Les critères Une méta-analyse a montré, sur 1 801 participants et 17 études randomisées contrôlées, que le risque relatif permettant de retrouver un grade I de Cormack-Lehane (soit la meilleure vue glottique) était de 2,4 (1,76 -2,49) en faveur du Pentax-AWS™ versus le laryngoscope à lame droite, p < 0,0001. Toutefois, elle ne montrait pas de différence significative en termes de rapidité d'intubation [29].…”

Section: Apport Des Vidéolaryngoscopesunclassified

Complications bucco-dentaires de l'intubation trachéale : apport des vidéolaryngoscopes

Derrien

Dovergne

Devisse

et al. 2017

Med Buccale Chir Buccale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a systematic review and meta-analysis including 17 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1,801 patients, Hoshijima et al (26) compared the Pentax-AWS versus Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients. They find that the Pentax-AWS offers a superior laryngeal view, but little clinical benefit over the direct laryngoscope.…”

Section: Performance Of Videolaryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

Videolaryngoscopy Assisted Intubation — New Era for Airway Management

Xue¹,

Liu²,

Li³

et al. 2016

J Anesth Perioper Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim of review:The aim of this article is to review the recent literatures regarding videolaryngoscopes, compare performance of videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy, discuss the role of videolaryngoscopy in clinical airway management and provide the measures that can improve the performance of videolaryngoscopy and decrease complications associated with videolaryngoscopy. Methods: The literatures about the use of videolaryngoscopes in the clinical airway management, published in the past decades, were searched from the Pubmed and Cochrane databases and reviewed, in order to determine their performance, and identify their limitations and find appropriate alternate techniques to overcome their shortcomings and failures. Recent findings: Videolaryngoscopes are promising intubation devices, which are easy to use, and the skills involved are easy to obtain by either novices or experienced intubators. In the current practice, videolaryngoscopes are commonly used as main devices of predicted difficult airways and as rescue tools of difficult or failed direct laryngoscopy. For patients with difficult airways, videolaryngoscopy can provide an improved laryngeal visualization and achieve a higher intubation success rate compared with direct laryngoscopy. Moreover, videolaryngoscopy has the potential to increase patient safety by facilitating learning, teaching, and success of tracheal intubation. Despite the very good laryngeal visualization, the insertion and advancement of the tracheal tube with videolaryngoscopy may occasionally fail, and the airway injuries associated with videolaryngoscopy can occur. Summary: The introduction of videolaryngoscopy has resulted in a dramatic transformation of clinical airway management and is seen as the evolutionary step in intubation technology. There are several different types of videolaryngoscopes available. Each device's features may offer advantages or disadvantages, depending on the situation the anesthetist has to deal with. To get the best out of videolaryngoscopy, all anesthetists must be trained in the use of videolaryngoscopes and such devices should be available in all sites where tracheal intubation is performed.

show abstract

Pentax Airway Scope^® vs Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Cited by 38 publications

References 50 publications

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Complications bucco-dentaires de l'intubation trachéale : apport des vidéolaryngoscopes

Videolaryngoscopy Assisted Intubation — New Era for Airway Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Pentax Airway Scope® vs Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Cited by 38 publications

References 50 publications

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Comparison of Pentax Airway Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children: A randomised non‐inferiority trial

Complications bucco-dentaires de l'intubation trachéale : apport des vidéolaryngoscopes

Videolaryngoscopy Assisted Intubation — New Era for Airway Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Pentax Airway Scope^® vs Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in adult patients: a systematic review and meta‐analysis