Comparison of GlideScope(®) versus Macintosh laryngoscope for the removal of a hypopharyngeal foreign body: a randomized cross-over cadaver study.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

This study aimed to evaluate whether GlideScope(®) is an effective and acceptable method for the removal of a hypopharyngeal foreign body.

METHODS:

This was a prospective study conducted in 28 first year emergency residents with little prior airway management experience. Participants extracted hypopharyngeal foreign bodies using a Macintosh laryngoscope and GlideScope(®) with Magill and Sponge forceps. The primary endpoints were extraction time and success rate with each device. Participant preferences were also assessed.

RESULTS:

The cumulative success rate in relation to time to extraction was significantly higher with the Macintosh laryngoscope than with the GlideScope(®) (p<0.001) regardless of the extraction device. Significantly fewer attempts were required for the first successful extraction with the Macintosh laryngoscope versus GlideScope(®) with Magill forceps (p=<0.001) and Sponge forceps (p=<0.001). The time for successful foreign body extraction using GlideScope(®) was significantly lower when using Magill (median 46 s, IQR 28-75 s) forceps than Sponge forceps (median 79 s, IQR 41-88 s).

CONCLUSIONS:

In this cadaver model, the Macintosh laryngoscope appeared to be more efficient and preferred than GlideScope(®) for extracting hypopharyngeal airway foreign bodies that are associated with fatal asphyxiation.

• Authors: Sang Mo Je, Min Joung Kim, Sung Phil Chung, Hyun Soo Chung
• Journal: Resuscitation (Resuscitation) Vol. 83 Issue 10 Pg. 1277-80 (Oct 2012) ISSN: 1873-1570 [Electronic] Ireland
• PMID: 22429970 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Journal Article)
• Copyright: Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Topics

• Adult
• Cadaver
• Cross-Over Studies
• Equipment Design
• Female
• Foreign Bodies (therapy)
• Humans
• Hypopharynx
• Laryngoscopes
• Laryngoscopy (education)
• Male
• Random Allocation