A comparison of the airway scope® and McCoy laryngoscope in patients with simulated restricted neck mobility

R. Komatsu, K. Kamata, D. I. Sessler, M. Ozaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We compared the efficacy of the Airway Scope® and McCoy laryngoscope as intubation tools with the neck stabilised by a rigid cervical collar. After induction of anaesthesia and neck stabilisation, 100 patients were randomly assigned to tracheal intubation with an Airway Scope or McCoy laryngoscope. Overall intubation success rate, time required for intubation, number of intubation attempts required for successful intubation, and airway complications related to intubation were recorded. Overall intubation success rates were 100% with both devices and a similar number of intubation attempts were required. However, the mean (SD) time required for successful intubation was shorter with the Airway Scope (30 (7) s) than with the McCoy laryngoscope (40 (14) s; p < 0.0001). The incidences of intubation complications were similar, but oesophageal intubation (in six cases) occurred only with McCoy laryngoscope.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)564-568
Number of pages5
JournalAnaesthesia
Volume65
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Jun 1
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of the airway scope<sup>®</sup> and McCoy laryngoscope in patients with simulated restricted neck mobility'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this