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.
|Number of pages||4|
|Journal||Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology|
|Publication status||Published - 2013 Aug 1|
- Glidescope Cobalt
- Nasotracheal intubation
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine