Comparison of Pentax-AWS, glidescope cobalt, and macintosh laryngoscope in patients for nasotracheal intubation

Yoshihiro Hirabayashi, Atsuko Matoba, Eiji Masaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: We compared the time for instrumentation in nasotracheal intubation using Pentax-AWS and Glidescope to that using the Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with normal airway. Methods: After local ethics board approval, 60 patients requiring dental or oral surgery were allocated randomly to Pentax-AWS, Glidescope and Macintosh groups. One experienced anesthesiologist performed nasotracheal intubation in all patients. Results: The times for instrumentation using Pentax-AWS and Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscope were 37 ± 12s, 33±9s, and 30 ± 12s, respectively. There were no differences among the three devices. Conclusions: When operated by experienced anesthesiologists, both Pentax-AWS and Glidescope showed similar performance for nasotracheal intubation compared with Macintosh laryngoscope in normal airway patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)952-955
Number of pages4
JournalJapanese Journal of Anesthesiology
Volume62
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Aug 1

Keywords

  • Glidescope Cobalt
  • Nasotracheal intubation
  • Pentax-AWS

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Pentax-AWS, glidescope cobalt, and macintosh laryngoscope in patients for nasotracheal intubation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this