A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000100019 |
Resumo: | BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n = 45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n = 45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation. |
id |
SBA-1_5394cf4d1765d384f57bb7bdc880815c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0034-70942016000100019 |
network_acronym_str |
SBA-1 |
network_name_str |
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgeryAirtraqHaemodynamic responseIntraocular pressureMacintosh blade BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n = 45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n = 45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia2016-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000100019Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia v.66 n.1 2016reponame:Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)instacron:SBA10.1016/j.bjane.2014.07.004info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessDas,BikramjitSamal,Rajiv KumarGhosh,ArupKundu,Ratuleng2016-02-15T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0034-70942016000100019Revistahttps://www.sbahq.org/revista/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||sba2000@openlink.com.br1806-907X0034-7094opendoar:2016-02-15T00:00Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
title |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
spellingShingle |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery Das,Bikramjit Airtraq Haemodynamic response Intraocular pressure Macintosh blade |
title_short |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
title_full |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
title_fullStr |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
title_full_unstemmed |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
title_sort |
A randomised comparative study of the effect of Airtraq optical laryngoscope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope on intraocular pressure in non-ophthalmic surgery |
author |
Das,Bikramjit |
author_facet |
Das,Bikramjit Samal,Rajiv Kumar Ghosh,Arup Kundu,Ratul |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Samal,Rajiv Kumar Ghosh,Arup Kundu,Ratul |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Das,Bikramjit Samal,Rajiv Kumar Ghosh,Arup Kundu,Ratul |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Airtraq Haemodynamic response Intraocular pressure Macintosh blade |
topic |
Airtraq Haemodynamic response Intraocular pressure Macintosh blade |
description |
BACKGROUND: We compared intraocular pressure changes following laryngoscopy and intubation with conventional Macintosh blade and Airtraq optical laryngoscope. METHODS: Ninety adult patients were randomly assigned to study group or control group. Study group (n = 45) - Airtraq laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Control group (n = 45) - conventional Macintosh laryngoscope was used for laryngoscopy. Preoperative baseline intraocular pressure was measured with Schiotz tonometer. Laryngoscopy was done as per group protocol. Intraocular pressure and haemodynamic parameters were recorded just before insertion of the device and subsequently three times at an interval of one minute after insertion of the device. RESULTS: Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic parameters and baseline intraocular pressure were comparable in the two groups. Following insertion of the endotracheal tube with Macintosh laryngoscope, there was statistically significant rise in heart rate and intraocular pressure compared to Airtraq group. There was no significant change in MAP. Eight patients in Macintosh group had tongue-lip-dental trauma during intubation, while only 2 patients received upper airway trauma in Airtraq group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that Airtraq laryngoscope in comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope results in significantly fewer rises in intraocular pressure and clinically less marked increase in haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-02-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000100019 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-70942016000100019 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1016/j.bjane.2014.07.004 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia v.66 n.1 2016 reponame:Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) instacron:SBA |
instname_str |
Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) |
instacron_str |
SBA |
institution |
SBA |
reponame_str |
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) |
collection |
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||sba2000@openlink.com.br |
_version_ |
1752126628611227648 |