We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison between Macintosh, Miller and McCoy laryngoscope blade size 2 in paediatric patients - A randomised controlled trial.
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia 2019 January
Background and Aims: Paediatric airway needs special consideration as it is not a miniature replica of adult airway, rather it has different anatomy with different proportion and angulations. This study was conducted with the aim to find a laryngoscope blade that provides best laryngoscopic and intubation conditions in paediatric patients of age 2-6 years.
Methods: This trial was conducted in a total of 75 children age 2-6 years, either gender, with American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I or II scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia. They were randomly allocated to groups A, B and C to be intubated with Macintosh, Miller and McCoy blades, respectively. Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) was considered as primary outcome, and Cormack-Lehane grade and Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score were taken as secondary outcome. Data were compared by ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis or chi square test using Statistica, SPSS and GraphPad Prism softwares. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: IDS score was significantly lower ( P = 0.002) in group B (0.6 ± 0.7) as compared to group A (1.4 ± 0.9) and group C (1.3 ± 1.1); majority of patients in group B (48%) had Cormack-Lehane grade Ι ( P = 0.002) unlike group A (0%) and group C (20%) and POGO score ( P < 0.001) was higher in group B (86 ± 23.4) when compared with groups A (68.2 ± 20.5) and C (59.8 ± 28.9). Haemodynamic changes and other intubation parameters were comparable among the groups.
Conclusion: Miller blade may be considered superior to Macintosh and McCoy blades in terms of glottic visualisation and ease of intubation in paediatric patients.
Methods: This trial was conducted in a total of 75 children age 2-6 years, either gender, with American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I or II scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia. They were randomly allocated to groups A, B and C to be intubated with Macintosh, Miller and McCoy blades, respectively. Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) was considered as primary outcome, and Cormack-Lehane grade and Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score were taken as secondary outcome. Data were compared by ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis or chi square test using Statistica, SPSS and GraphPad Prism softwares. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: IDS score was significantly lower ( P = 0.002) in group B (0.6 ± 0.7) as compared to group A (1.4 ± 0.9) and group C (1.3 ± 1.1); majority of patients in group B (48%) had Cormack-Lehane grade Ι ( P = 0.002) unlike group A (0%) and group C (20%) and POGO score ( P < 0.001) was higher in group B (86 ± 23.4) when compared with groups A (68.2 ± 20.5) and C (59.8 ± 28.9). Haemodynamic changes and other intubation parameters were comparable among the groups.
Conclusion: Miller blade may be considered superior to Macintosh and McCoy blades in terms of glottic visualisation and ease of intubation in paediatric patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app