Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India:
CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd.
www.cbspd.com
|
customercare@cbspd.com
Videolaryngoscopy has emerged not only as an alternative to direct laryngoscopy for airway intubation in adults and children but also as a new diagnostic and therapeutic tool in head and neck surgery. Videolaryngoscopy has a great advantage over direct laryngoscopy because it has been proven to reduce difficult views of the laryngeal opening (glottis). The success of intubation with a videolaryngoscope depends on both the type of device used and the experience of the operator. Technical details, such as the device’s size and blade choice, properly reshaping the endotracheal tube, and customized hand-eye coordination, are all particularly important for targeting the endotracheal tube toward the glottis. Besides its clinical role in airway management, videolaryngoscopy is an excellent tool for education and medicolegal recording.
University Department of Anaesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine, Sveti Duh University Hospital, Croatia
Faculty of Medicine, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University, Croatia
*Address all correspondence to: tanjagoranovic@hotmail.com
1. Introduction
Videolaryngoscopy represents a significant improvement in endotracheal intubation and thus an improvement in airway safety. Namely, it is well known that to increase airway safety, it is necessary to apply the appropriate concept of airway visualization on which airway strategies and airway algorithms are based [1]. It is generally believed that improving the visualization of the laryngeal opening (glottis) as the most important airway structure for intubation significantly increases the success of intubation.
The classic concept of endotracheal intubation by direct laryngoscopy is based on the alignment of three axes (oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal) to expose the laryngeal opening (glottis) to the external observer’s eye, who places the tube through the glottis under the full control of eyesight [2]. This requires an appropriate head and neck position, a laryngoscope, and a precise laryngoscope application technique [3]. Often, the position adjustment should be instituted in case of poor visualization of the glottis [4]. Videolaryngoscopy uses optical technology to improve glottis visualization without the need to align the three axes of the airway, which might be especially useful in neck mobility limitations when it is not possible to extend the neck [5, 6]. In addition to better visualization of the glottis, videolaryngoscopy has proven to be a very successful intubation technique in operators with little or no experience [7, 8, 9], involves all airway team members [10, 11, 12], and is an important tool for perioperative airway assessment, airway care education, and medicolegal intubation recording [12, 13].
Although videolaryngoscopy as a technique of airway management has been an extremely popular topic for the last decade, the fact is that the principle of indirect airway visualization, on which it is based, is older than direct laryngoscopy. In 1829, Benjamin Guy Babington (1794–1866) described the first “glottoscope” or “glottiscope,” which consisted of a speculum to displace the tongue (a tongue depressor) and a system of mirrors to visualize the larynx, with sunlight for illumination [14, 15, 16]. Yet since 1895, when Alfred Kirstein (1863–1922) developed the “autoscope” that had an external electrical light source, the developmental pathway of laryngoscopy has focused on direct laryngoscopy [15, 16]. Consequently, since the 1940s, when the Macintosch and Miller blade were introduced [17], direct laryngoscopy has been the gold standard of endotracheal intubation.
In 1998, Markus Weiss incorporated fiberoptic fibers into a direct laryngoscope with a Macintosh blade [18]. In 2001, John Pacey introduced the first videolaryngoscope called the Glidescope®, and since then the number of different devices using videolaryngoscopy has grown [17]. In 2013, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) suggested the use of videolaryngoscopy as the first choice in airway management in its algorithm of airway management [19]. The Difficult Airway Society (DAS), in the 2015 algorithm, recognized the use of videolaryngoscopy as part of the airway management and suggested to all anesthesiologists the adoption of the videolaringoscopy skills [20]. It is recommended that videolaryngoscope should be immediately available for all obstetric general anesthetics [21]. In 2017, DAS presented videolaryngoscopy as an equivalent technique to direct laryngoscopy in the first attempts of intubation in the airway management algorithm in intensive care units (ICUs) [22].
The technique of videolaryngoscopy depends on the type of device used.
Table 1 lists some of the videolaryngoscopes. The division of videolaryngoscopes into the channeled and non-channeled devices has practical implications as the technique of videolaryngoscopy also differs significantly whether it is channeled or non-channeled one (Figures 1–3).
Type
Blade type
Name
Manufacturer
Channeled
N/A
Airtraq®
Prodol, Vizcaya, Spain
Pentax AWS®
Pentax-AWS, Ambu Glen Burnie MD, USA
King Vision®
King System, Nobesville, IN, USA
Airway Scope®
Pentax, Tokyo, Japan
Res-Q-Scope II
N/A
Non-channeled
Angulated blade
Storz V-MAC®/C-MAC®
Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany
McGrath MAC®
Aircraft Medical, Edinburgh, Scotland
Glidescope® Core™, Titanium™ Spectrum™
Glidescope, Verathon, WA, USA
APA™ MAC
Venner Medical, Singapore, Singapore
Infinium ClearVue®
QuadMed, Inc. Jacksonville, FL, USA
AP Venerscope®
Intravent Direct, Maidenhead, UK
Truview PCD™-R
Truphatek International Limited, Netanya, Israel
Hyperangulated blade
C-MAC D-blade®
Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany
McGrath Series 5®
Aircraft Medical, Edinburgh, Scotland
Glidescope® Core™, Titanium™ Spectrum™
Glidescope, Verathon, WA, USA
APA™ DAB & U-DAB
Venner Medical, Singapore, Singapore
Infinium Clear Vue®
Quamed, Inc. Jackonsville, FL, USA
Table 1.
Channeled and non-channeled videolaryngoscopes [10, 15, 23, 24].
N/A, not applicable.
Figure 1.
Airtraq® as an example of the channeled videolaryngoscope (own photography).
Figure 2.
Storz C-MAC D blade® as an example of the non-channeled videolaryngoscope with a metal reusable blade (own photography).
Figure 3.
Infinium ClearVue® as an example of the channeled videolaryngoscope with a plastic single use blade (own photography).
Non-channeled devices are further divided depending on the type of blade, which can be of the Macintosh, Miller, or hyperangular type, which also further influences the choice of technique (Figure 4). Blades can be manufactured from plastic for a single use or from metal for a multiple use. The screen can be on the device itself (Figure 5) or on a separate external monitor (Figure 6), which can be placed on the side or above the patient’s chest. The position of the monitor does not significantly affect the technique, but it requires good eye-hand coordination like all endoscopic techniques.
Figure 4.
Different single use plastic blades of the videolaryngoscope (A) Macintosh and (B) hyperangular (own photography).
Figure 5.
An incorporated screen of the videolaryngoscope on a device itself (own photography).
It is important to note that videolaryngoscopy, in broader meaning, includes all devices that assist laryngoscopy by video technology. Besides the above described videolaryngoscopes, it includes different video intubating stylets and videoendoscopes, too. These devices are equipped with an inbuilt camera and light source [23, 24]. Compared to the older versions of videostylets which were designed as rigid linear rods, the newer intubating stylets are often S-shaped and semiflexible with deflectable tips [25, 26]. The devices can have an eyepiece at their end or can be attached to monitor to allow watching at the screen. Table 2 lists some video intubating stylets.
Figure 6.
The screen of the videolaryngoscope on an external monitor (own photography).
3.1 Technique of videolaryngoscopy with a channeled videolaryngoscope
The tube is placed in the dedicated groove of the device (Figure 7). The tube or the channel on the device can be lightly lubricated to reduce friction. During this preparation, make sure that the lubricant does not obscure the light source and the outer glass of the screen. The size of the tube should be adjusted to the size of the channel. Namely, these devices differ in size, and the size of the channel is also different. When placing the tube, the top of the tube is displayed on the visible screen as a crescent. The entire device with the tube placed in this way is carefully embedded through the open mouth deep into the pharynx with the dominant hand, paying attention to the structures in the mouth (lips, teeth, and palate). If external resistance is encountered due to large breasts, etc., the device can be turned with the concave side toward the palate firstly, then it can be placed in the mouth and when it reaches the level of the soft palate, it can be rotated to cover the base of the tongue (similar to positioning a Guedel tube). The device is then grasped with the left hand, the eye of the operator is brought closer to the eyepiece or the gaze is directed to the external screen and the whole device is pulled out vertically to the axis of the pharynx so that the glottis is displayed in the middle of the eyepiece or external screen. A slight rotation of the device to the left or to the right by 90 degrees can also help. When the glottis is displayed in the middle of the screen, the tube is carefully pushed through the channel with the free right hand, targeting the glottis. When the tube passes the vocal cords, the tube is displaced from the channel laterally and separated from the whole device carefully. The whole device is carefully removed from the pharynx and the mouth, taking care not to accidentally pull the tube from the trachea.
Figure 7.
Tube placed in a dedicated groove in a channeled videolaryngoscope (own photography).
3.2 Technique of videolaryngoscopy with a non-channeled videolaryngoscope
The technique of videolaryngoscopy with a non-channeled device largely differs depending on the type of the blade.
If a Macintosh blade (slightly curved) is used (Figure 8), the video laryngoscopy technique is similar to direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh blade, except for watching the progression of the blade and later a tube indirectly on the screen and not directly through the mouth. The mouth is opened, the laryngoscope is taken by the left hand (Figure 9), and the tip of the blade is inserted into the right corner of the patient’s lip. This step should be watched directly to avoid injuries of the lips and teeth. When the blade is placed in the right corner of the patient’s lip, the operator moves his/her gaze toward the screen and from then on keeps watching the screen. The lateral left side of the blade encloses the patient’s tongue, moving it medially from the buccal mucosa. The moment the tip of the blade reaches the base of the tongue, the blade is straightened in the medial line and the operator should try to display the uvula to be positioned in the middle of the lower edge of the screen. The entire laryngoscope is then gently moved up and forwarded at a 45-degree angle to display the epiglottis and glottis, and the tip of the blade is directed into the vallecula. It is important to position the glottis in the middle of the screen, and if possible, to visualize the space around the glottis including the surrounding lateral wall of the pharynx, without getting too close to the glottis. The tube should be performed with a stylet in such a way that the curve of the tube follows the curve of the blade. The preformed tube with the stylet is lowered with the right hand down the groove of the spatula targeting the opening of the glottis. If it is not possible to reach the opening in this way, then the tube is grasped more freely with the right hand and, regardless of the groove of the blade, is directed at any angle to the laryngeal opening. In order to be able to control the direction of the tube beyond the groove and rotate it in different directions if necessary, it is important to have a wider field of view on the screen; that is, in addition to seeing the glottis, it is advisable to see the cavity of the pharynx and the tip of the tube itself. Instead of a tube, a bougie can be used in the described manner, and when it passes the vocal cords, the tube is pulled over the bougie according to the principle of the Seldinger technique.
Figure 8.
A videolaryngoscope with a Macintoch blade (own photography).
Figure 9.
Grasping a videolaryngoscope with the left hand; a tube is handled with the right hand (own photography).
If a Miller (straight) blade is used, the video laryngoscopy technique is similar to direct laryngoscopy with a Miller blade. The mouth is opened, the laryngoscope is taken in the left hand, and the tip of the blade is entered into the right corner of the patient’s lip. The lateral left side of the blade encloses the tongue, moving it medially from the buccal mucosa. The moment the tip of the blade reaches the base of the tongue, the spatula straightens in the medial line and tries to display the uvula to be positioned in the middle of the lower edge of the screen. The entire laryngoscope is then gently moved up and forward at a 45-degree angle in an effort to display the epiglottis and glottis, and the tip of the blade is directed below the epiglottis to lift it and better display the glottis. The further procedure is as described above.
If a hyperangular blade is used (Figure 10), then, unlike the procedures described above, the blade is immediately placed medially in the mouth and progressively directed toward the base of the tongue along the medial line of the tongue. At this point, lifting the base of the tongue attempts to visualize the uvula and place it similar to the one described above by displaying the uvula to the middle of the lower edge of the screen. The further procedure is as described above. To avoid the possible situation of obviously seeing the glottis but not being able to pass the tube through it, it is important to carefully preform the tube according to the hyperangular blade (Figure 11). If necessary, a metal stylet can be used too (Figure 12). And again, instead of a tube, a bougie, which is more plastic, can be used in the described manner, and when it passes the vocal cords, the tube is pulled over the bougie according to the principle of the Seldinger technique.
Figure 10.
A videolaryngoscope with a hyperangular blade (own photography).
Figure 11.
Preforming a tube by a stylet to adjust the curve of the tube to the hyperangular blade (own photography).
The primary use of videolaryngoscopy is the intubation guiding after the induction of general anesthesia in operation theaters, intensive care units, and emergency departments. Various specific pathologies that complicate intubation and represent possible situations of difficult airway management have been successfully overcome by using videolaryngoscopy.
Meta-analyses have shown that videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy reduces impossible intubations in expected difficult intubation in adults [27]. Among individual videolaryngoscopes, regardless of the subjective impressions of clinicians, there is no evidence that a single videolaryngoscope is better than others except specifically only the C-MAC Macintosh blade [27]. Evidence further suggests that videolaryngoscope versus direct laryngoscopy facilitates intubation, improves glottis visualization, and reduces the number of impossible glottis visualizations and reduces laryngeal airway trauma [27]. Cochran’s 2016 systematic analysis did not prove that videolaryngoscopy reduces the number of intubation attempts. There were insufficient data to establish a temporal comparison of videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy of the impact of videolaryngoscopy on hypoxia and respiratory complications, the impact of obesity, and the impact of the site and circumstances of intubation (intensive care unit, emergency medicine) [27]. In children, in contrast to adults, the evidence shows that the number of intubation attempts using videolaryngoscopy is increased compared to direct laryngoscopy, the success of first attempt intubation is not increased, and moreover, the intubation time is extended [28, 29].
Although videolaryngoscopy improves visualization, evidence suggests that traditional direct laryngoscopy is a sufficiently successful method of airway management in intensive care units. Moreover, some evidence suggests that the number of complications when using videolaryngoscopy in intensive care units is higher, especially if used by inexperienced operators [30]. Therefore, for routine airway management in intensive care units, direct laryngoscopy is still recommended as first choice, but videolaryngoscopy is also recommended in a situation of unsuccessful direct laryngoscopy or in the case of expected difficult intubation in the hands of experts [31, 32]. There is a positive trend of using videolaryngoscopy in pediatric ICUs, particularly in older children and those with the positive history of difficult airway. However, there is still no demonstration that this trend has decreased the rate of severe tracheal intubation adverse events or lowered multiple attempts at endotracheal intubation [33].
4.1.2 Double lumen tube orotracheal intubation
Videolaryngoscopy can be used successfully for guiding a double lumen tube. Admittedly, according to some, it prolongs intubation time but improves visualization [34, 35].
4.1.3 Nasotracheal intubation
Although videolaryngoscopy does not improve the overall success of intubation in nasotracheal intubation, it has been shown to improve the success of the first attempt and shorten the intubation time [36].
4.1.4 Intubation of cervical spine pathology
In a clinical scenario of immobilized cervical spine, specifically McGrath®, C-MAC® D- blade, and Airtraq® [37] increase intubation success [38].
4.1.5 Awake intubation
Videolaryngoscopy is proving to be a successful alternative to fiberoptic bronchoscopy in awake intubation because it shortens intubation time, although intubation success and safety profile are indistinguishable [39, 40]. This benefit is recognized for bariatric patients [41, 42] and patients with cervical trauma [43].
4.1.6 Intubation of the patients with suspected or proven COVID-19
Due to less direct contact of the operator with the generated aerosol during the intubation, videolaryngoscopy has been recommended in recent airway management algorithms for the patients with suspected or proven COVID-19 [44]. When this is feasible, it is preferred to use disposable blades and protective shields over the devices to avoid their contaminations and possible cross-transmission of the virus SARS-CoV-2 [45].
The combined use of flexible bronchoscopy with rigid videolaryngoscopy benefits from the strengths of both techniques in normal and difficult airways. Although first associations were reported for specific videolaryngoscopes [46, 47], this concept seems to be independent of the specific brand or type of videolaryngoscope and flexible bronchoscope [48].
4.1.8 Insertion of different devices into oropharynx
Videolaryngoscopy can be particularly useful for guiding and correcting malposition of different devices through oropharynx such as nasogastric or orogastric tube [49], esophagoscopes, gastroscopes, or transesophageal echocardiography probe [50]. In addition, it can be useful when placing throat packs in oral and maxillofacial surgery. In thyroid surgery, it is useful for the visualization the proper placement of electromyographyic tube since the sensor mark on the tube should be placed exactly at the level of vocal cords [51, 52].
4.1.9 Diagnosis and recording of upper airway pathology
In addition to intubation, videolaryngoscopy has been shown to be successful for diagnostic and therapeutic surgical interventions in head and neck surgery. It has shown even superiority compared to videolaryngostroboscopy in diagnostic of different vocal pathologies [53]. Videolaryngoscopy can assist or replace traditional direct laryngoscopes for diagnostic of vocal pathology and small therapeutic procedures such as vocal polypectomies [54]. In addition, it can be used as an assistance device for small procedures involving the tongue base, such as biopsies, foreign body removal like coins, fish bones, etc., and radiofrequency treatment of obstructive sleep [55, 56, 57]. Using the C-MAC and a pair of Magill forceps, some authors reported to be able to successfully remove the duodenal stent dislodged in proximal esophagus [58]. Videolaryngoscopy, in combination with apnoic technique with spontaneous ventilation, was shown to be effective in pediatric cases for a safe, speedy, and successful removal of the foreign body with respect to an unprotected airway, wherein tracheal intubation was not a viable option [59].
4.2 Educational and research usage of videolaryngoscopy
Videolaryngoscopy is an excellent tool for teaching because it allows unhindered supervision of the intubation procedure [60]. In practice, it proves to be a particularly useful tool for introducing beginners to intubation procedures. Moreover, depending on the choice of blade and type of device, it allows the education of different advanced intubation techniques comparable to direct laryngoscopy, including a combination of different techniques [61]. The supervisor follows the procedure performed by the student in a real time with possibility to guide the student verbally or manually with prompt feedback of what has been done. To gain an expertise in situations of unexpected difficult airway, it is necessary to learn how to manage expected difficult airway during routine intubations. Evidence suggests that using videolaryngoscopy during intubation significantly helps in mastering the intubation technique by the trainees even in the most sensitive populations for intubation such as newborns [62, 63].
As a relatively new technique with plenty of new innovative devices, videolaryngoscopy is currently a fruitful subject for the researchers interested in airway management. However, as the indications for its use spread, videolaryngoscopy may be used as an auxiliary tool for the other static and dynamic researches that include visualization of oropharynx and the upper airway.
4.3 Medicolegal usage of videolaryngoscopy
The possibility of recording the videolaryngoscopy procedure and subsequent reviewing of the recorded material offers the possibility of a thorough analysis of the procedure, which itself lasts a limited short time. The first such application was described in 1987 with the purpose of recording the vocal cords during vocal therapies [64]. Recorded material during videolaryngoscopy can be reproduced multiple times, which can be useful in subsequent analyzes that can be done for various medicolegal purposes (Video 1, Video 2, Video 3, and Video 4). It is especially useful to use archived images and videos as the part of preoperative preparation in patients for whom difficult intubation is expected. Another practical indication could be the examination of vocal cords after thyroid surgery and recording for medicolegal issues.
5. Limitations and complications of videolaryngoscopy
Despite the advantages and widespread use of videolaryngoscopy, there are some limitations that may be viewed as absolute or relative contraindications [13]. The only real absolute contraindication for videolaryngoscopy is the significant limitation of opening a mouth which does not allow to insert the blade. In this situation, retromolar intubation with videostylets or fiberoptic intubation, that are comparably smaller devices, may be a good alternative.
Fogging and secretions may obscure view, but they can be solved. Newer devices have additional antifogging adds and one should be aware about it during airway intubation. Adding oxygen may help in antifogging too, while successive early aspiration of secretion may be effective.
The most frustrating situation is when the passage of tube may be difficult despite great view (“laryngoscopic paradox”) [13, 24]. However, one must be aware of his/her understanding of the basic videolaryngoscopy concepts. Indeed, as the acute angle is often very sharp, an acutely angled stylet is necessary. In addition, depth perception is lost with a two-dimensional video image, and sometimes, operators may become fixated on the video screen and may not directly observe where the laryngoscope blade or endotracheal tube is being placed [24]. The consequences of this unawareness of the situation are injuries of soft tissues such as soft palate, tonsillar, or pharyngeal wall perforation [65, 66, 67, 68]. According to one study female gender, right tonsillar pillars and soft palate were the most frequently injured [69]. The most common repair of these soft tissues’ injuries was simple surgical closure with no long-term harm [69].
Additional limitations of videolaryngoscopy are as follows: the need of experience and the time demand for the operator to learn how to use them properly, the rapid deterioration of their display in the presence of a swelling or a secretion, and the fact that they are rather complicated and expensive devices [70].
There are few useful tips that can be practiced to avoid complications. It is particularly important to prepare the tube with the stylet to follow the angle of the blade. As a mnemonic aid, one can remember the abbreviation “CCLL”: (1) Choose the right tube, (2) Check the endotracheal tube cuff, (3) Lubricate the stylet and the endotracheal tube (but spare the camera and the light source), and (4) Load the stylet (i.e., band it according to the angle of videolaryngoscopy blade).
To gain great maneuverability with the tube, it is advisable to hold the tube closer to its connector, not to be to too close with the view to the glottis (back it up), and in the case of difficulty, passing through the glottis to use the bougie [71]. In addition, some propose to view videolaryngoscopy as a four-step procedure: First step is to look in the mouth and insert the videolaryngoscopy blade under direct vision. The next step is to look at the screen while gently advancing with the blade toward epiglottis to get the best glottic view. The third step is to move the look again to the mouth while inserting the tube under the direct vision to avoid trauma of soft tissues. And finally, the fourth step, is again to look at the screen to complete intubation. This step will probably need extra rotations and angulations of the tube. It is important that the stylet removal and the tube adjustments are done under direct visualizations [72].
Videolaryngoscopy can be used effectively in situations of expected and unexpected difficult airway management. There are several devices for videolaryngoscopy, which differ technically, but with a thorough knowledge of the technical specific details, the success of the use of different videolaryngoscopes in intubation is similar. The choice of a specific videolaryngoscope depends on the individual patient, local resources, and the expertise of the operator. The simplicity and benefits of using videolaryngoscopy lead enthusiasts to entitle videolaryngoscopy as the miracle solution for all possible situations where airway visualization and airway management is required. But, in clinical reality, videolaryngoscopy, like any airway management technique, has its advantages and disadvantages. Its great advantage is that even its shortcomings can be learned faster and more efficiently, because the procedure is widely visible to a larger number of participants gathered in the airway care team in a real time. Therefore, videolaryngoscopy is not only an excellent teaching tool for mastering the airway management with its use but also with other airway devices which can be used as single or in various combinations. In addition, videolaryngoscopy has proven to be a useful technique in other clinical situations besides intubation, such as diagnostics of upper airway and small laryngeal surgeries. Finally, videolaryngoscopy is also an important medicolegal tool for all topics related to airway care as it allows immediate and delayed post-procedure analysis by reproducing its recordings.
Nowadays, many societies’ guidelines recommend to use videolaryngoscopy early in intubation attempts in order to aim first-pass intubation success. It is possible that even in close future, it will replace direct intubation as the gold standard. However, for such an evolution, it is necessary for the clinicians to master the videolaryngoscopy technique by daily practicing.
Good preparation makes half of the technique. It is important to be aware of the device characteristics, especially technical details such as the resolution and fogging of the screen, the size and the angle of the blade, and the need to use preformed tube by stylet. During the process of videolaryngoscopy, it is advisable to think about it as a four-step procedure with alternately looking in the mouth and at the screen. Direct and indirect visualization of the upper airway should be complemented with customized hand-eye coordination. If accepted, these routine tips can minimize majority of traumatic complications. Primum nil nocere.
1.Yang GZ, Xue FS, Sun C, Liu GP. Difficult airway management: Correct concepts and algorithm are important for patient safety. Chinese Medical Journal. 2016;129:1886-1887. DOI: 10.4103/0366-6999.186647
2.Greenland KB, Eley V, Edwards MJ, Allen P, Irwin MG. The origins of the sniffing position and the Three Axes Alignment Theory for direct laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 2008;36(Suppl 1):23-27. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0803601s05
3.Greenland KB. A proposed model for direct laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia. 2008;63:156-161. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05326.x
4.El-Orbany M, Woehlck H, Salem MR. Head and neck position for direct laryngoscopy. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2011;113:103-109. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31821c7e9c
5.Farag E. Airway management for cervical spine surgery. Review. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Anaesthesiology. 2016;30:13-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2016.01.001
6.Holmes MG, Dagal A, Feinstein BA, Joffe AM. Airway management practice in adults with an unstable cervical spine: The harborview medical center experience. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2018;127:450-454. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003374
7.Howard-Quijano KJ, Huang YM, Matevosian R, Kaplan MB, Steadman RH. Video-assisted instruction improves the success rate for tracheal intubation by novices. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2008;101:568-572. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aen211
8.Aghamohammadi H, Massoudi N, Fathi M, Jaffari A, Gharaei B, Moshki A. Intubation learning curve: comparison between video and direct laryngoscopy by inexperienced students. Journal of Medicine and Life. 2015;8(Spec Iss 4):150-153
9.Eismann H, Sieg L, Etti N, Friedrich L, Schröter C, Mommsen P, et al. Improved success rates using videolaryngoscopy in unexperienced users: A randomized crossover study in airway manikins. European Journal of Medical Research. 2017;22:27. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-017-0268-7
10.Paolini JB, Donati F, Drolet P. Review article: Video-laryngoscopy: Another tool for difficult intubation or a new paradigm in airway management? Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2013;60:184-191. DOI: 10.1007/s12630-012-9859-5
12.Cook TM, Boniface NJ, Seller C, Hughes J, Damen C, MacDonald L, et al. Universal videolaryngoscopy: A structured approach to conversion to videolaryngoscopy for all intubations in an anaesthetic and intensive care department. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2018;120:173-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2017.11.014
13.Maldini B, Hodžović I, Goranović T, Mesarić J. Challenges in the use of video laryngoscopes. Acta Clinica Croatica. 2016;55(Suppl 1):41-50
14.Lapeña JF. Mirrors and reflections: the evolution of indirect laryngoscopy. Annals of Saudi Medicine. 2013;33:177-181. DOI: 10.5144/0256-4947.2013.177
15.Pieters BM, Eindhoven GB, Acott C, van Zundert AA. Pioneers of laryngoscopy: Indirect, direct and video laryngoscopy. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 2015;43(Suppl):4-11. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X150430S103
16.Toker K. Visualization of airway. Acta Clinica Croatica. 2016;55(Suppl 1):73-75
17.Treki AA, Straker T. Limitations of the videolaryngoscope: An anesthetic management reality. International Anesthesiology Clinics. 2017;55:97-104. DOI: 10.1097/AIA.0000000000000130
18.Weiss M. Video-intuboscopy: A new aid to routine and difficult tracheal intubation. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 1998;80:525-527. DOI: 10.1093/bja/80.4.525
19.Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Blitt CD, Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, et al. Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: An updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology. 2013;118:251-270. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31827773b2
20.Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Mendonca C, Bhagrath R, Patel A, et al. Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2015;115:827-848. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aev371
21.Mushambi MC, Kinsella SM, Popat M, Swales H, Ramaswamy KK, Winton AL, et al. Obstetric Anaesthetists’ Association and Difficult Airway Society guidelines for the management of difficult and failed tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia. 2015;70:1286-1306. DOI: 10.1111/anae.13260
22.Higgs A, McGrath BA, Goddard C, Rangasami J, Suntharalingam G, Gale R, et al. Guidelines for the management of tracheal intubation in critically ill adults. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2018;120:323-352. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2017.10.021
23.Maldini B, Hodžović I, Goranović T. Alternative devices in airway visualization. Acta Clinica Croatica. 2016;55(Suppl 1):76-84
24.Hurford WE. The video revolution: A new view of laryngoscopy. Respiratory Care. 2010;55:1036-1045
25.Setty H, Rawlings JL, Dubin S. Video RIFL: A rigid flexible laryngoscope to facilitate airway management. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 2010;22:642-647. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2009.10.019
26.Biro P. The SensaScope®–A new hybrid video intubation stylet. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. 2011;5:411-413. DOI: 10.4103/1658-354X.87271
27.Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, Cook TM, Smith AF. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;11:CD011136. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011136.pub2
28.Park R, Peyton JM, Fiadjoe JE, Hunyady AI, Kimball T, Zurakowski D, et al. The efficacy of GlideScope® videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy in children who are difficult to intubate: An analysis from the paediatric difficult intubation registry. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2017;119:984-992. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aex344
29.Abdelgadir IS, Phillips RS, Singh D, Moncreiff MP, Lumsden JL. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in children (excluding neonates). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017;5:CD011413. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011413.pub2
30.Cabrini L, Landoni G, Baiardo Redaelli M, Saleh O, Votta CD, Fominskiy E, et al. Tracheal intubation in critically ill patients: a comprehensive systematic review of randomized trials. Critical Care. 2018;22:6. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-017-1927-3
31.Umobong EU, Mayo PH. Critical care airway management. Critical Care Clinics. 2018;34:313-324. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccc.2018.03.006
32.Jaber S, De Jong A, Pelosi P, Cabrini L, Reignier J, Lascarrou JB. Videolaryngoscopy in critically ill patients. Critical Care. 2019;23:221. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-019-2487-5
33.Grunwell JR, Kamat PP, Miksa M, Krishna A, Walson K, Simon D, et al. Trend and outcomes of video laryngoscope use across PICUs. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine. 2017;18:741-749. DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000001175
34.Belze O, Lepage E, Bazin Y, Kerourin P, Fusciardi J, Remérand F, et al. Glidescope versus Airtraq DL for double-lumen tracheal tube insertion in patients with a predicted or known difficult airway: A randomised study. European Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2017;34:456-463. DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000655
35.Risse J, Schubert AK, Wiesmann T, Huelshoff A, Stay D, Zentgraf M, et al. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation in thoracic surgery–A randomised controlled clinical trial. BMC Anesthesiology. 2020;20:150. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-020-01067-x
36.Jiang J, Ma DX, Li B, Wu AS, Xue FS. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for nasotracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 2019;52:6-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.08.029
37.Suppan L, Tramèr MR, Niquille M, Grosgurin O, Marti C. Alternative intubation techniques vs Macintosh laryngoscopy in patients with cervical spine immobilization: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2016;116:27-36. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aev205
38.Kleine-Brueggeney M, Greif R, Schoettker P, Savoldelli GL, Nabecker S, Theiler LG. Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway: A multicentre randomized controlled trial. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2016;116:670-679. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aew058
39.Jiang J, Ma DX, Li B, Wu AS, Xue FS. Videolaryngoscopy versus fiberoptic bronchoscope for awake intubation–A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management. 2018;14:1955-1963. DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S172783
40.Alhomary M, Ramadan E, Curran E, Walsh SR. Videolaryngoscopy vs. fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia. 2018;73:1151-1161. DOI: 10.1111/anae.14299
41.Moore AR, Schricker T, Court O. Awake videolaryngoscopy-assisted tracheal intubation of the morbidly obese. Anaesthesia. 2012;67:232-235. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06979.x
42.Moore A, El-Bahrawy A, El-Mouallem E, Lattermann R, Hatzakorzian R, LiPishan W, et al. Videolaryngoscopy or fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake intubation of bariatric patients with predicted difficult airways–A randomised, controlled trial. Anaesthesia. 2017;72:538-539. DOI: 10.1111/anae.13850
43.Dutta K, Sriganesh K, Chakrabarti D, Pruthi N, Reddy M. Cervical spine movement during awake orotracheal intubation with fiberoptic scope and Mcgrath videolaryngoscope in patients undergoing surgery for cervical spine instability: A randomized control trial. Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology. 2020;32:249-255. DOI: 10.1097/ANA.0000000000000595
44.Cook TM, El-Boghdadly K, McGuire B, McNarry AF, Patel A, Higgs A. Consensus guidelines for managing the airway in patients with COVID-19: Guidelines from the Difficult Airway Society, the Association of Anaesthetists the Intensive Care Society, the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine and the Royal College of Anaesthetists. Anaesthesia. 2020;75:785-799. DOI: 10.1111/anae.15054
45.Brewster DJ, Chrimes N, Do TBT, Frase KR, Groombridge CJ, Higgs A, et al. Consensus statement: Safe Airway Society principles of airway management and tracheal intubation specific to the COVID-19 adult patient group. Medical Journal of Australia. 2020;212:472-481. DOI: 10.5694/mja2.50598
46.Greib N, Stojeba N, Dow WA, Henderson J, Diemunsch PA. A combined rigid videolaryngoscopy-flexible fibrescopy intubation technique under general anesthesia. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2007;54:492-493. DOI: 10.1007/BF03022046
47.Choi GS, Park SI, Lee EH, Yoon SH. Awake Glidescope(R) intubation in a patient with a huge and fixed supraglottic mass -a case report. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology. 2010;59:S26-S29
48.Boet S, Bould MD, Diemunsch PA. Combined rigid videolaryngoscopy-flexible bronchoscopy for intubation. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology. 2011;60:381-382. DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2011.60.5.381
49.Okabe T, Goto G, Hori Y, Sakamoto A. Gastric tube insertion under direct vision using the king vision™ video laryngoscope: A randomized, prospective, clinical trial. BMC Anesthesiology. 2014;14:82. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2253-14-82
50.Ishida T, Kiuchi C, Sekiguchi T, Tsujimoto T, Kawamata M. McGRATH MAC video laryngoscope for insertion of a transoesophageal echocardiography probe: A randomised controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2016;33:263-268. Published online 2015 Nov 15. DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000367
51.Berkow L, Dackiw APB, Tufano RP. Use of the GlideScope for placement of a recurrent laryngeal nerve monitoring endotracheal tube. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 2011;23:81-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2009.12.013
52.Chang PY, Hu PY, Lin YC, Chen HY, Chiang FY, Wu CW, et al. Trachway video intubating stylet allows for optimization of electromyographic endotracheal tube placement for monitored thyroidectomy. Gland Surgery. 2017;6:464-468. DOI: 10.21037/gs.2017.08.08
53.Kaushik MR, Kole AS, Gupta N, Dhoot S, Dehadaray A. Evaluation of various laryngeal pathologies: Videolaryngoscopy versus videolaryngostroboscopy. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2018;70:244-248. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-017-1115-4
54.Shenson JA, Marcott S, Dewan K, Lee YJ, Mariano ER, Sirjani DB. Utility of videolaryngoscopy for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in head and neck surgery. American Journal of Otolaryngology. 2020;41:102284. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2019.102284
55.Shenoy PK, Aldea M. The use of GlideScope for biopsies of the tongue base. The Journal of Laryngology and Otology. 2013;127:215-216
56.Bruno E, Dauri M, Mauramati S, Viziano A, Micarelli A, Ottaviani F, et al. Utility of Glidescope(®) videolaryngoscopy in surgical procedures involving the larynx. Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica. 2015;35:45-48
57.Shamim F, Nafis M, Ikram M. Other clinical applications of videolaryngoscopy besides intubation. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia. 2018;12:491-492. DOI: 10.4103/sja.SJA_697_17
58.Ho G, Singh N, Andrews J, Westhead P. Novel use of videolaryngoscopy to remove a foreign body. BML Case Reports. 2015;2015:bcr2015210011. DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2015-210011
59.Punnoose SE, Victor J, Hazarika P, SS M. C-MAC® video-laryngoscope assisted removal of pediatric upper airway foreign body via apneic technique: Two case reports. SAGE Open Medical Case Reports. 2019;7:2050313X18823088
60.Pouppirt NR, Foglia EE, Ades A. A video is worth a thousand words: Innovative uses of videolaryngoscopy. Archives of Disease in Childhood. Fetal and Neonatal Edition. 2018;103:F401-F402. DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-314288
61.Ozgul U, Erdil FA, Erdogan MA, Begec Z, Colak C, Yucel A, et al. Comparison of videolaryngoscope-guided versus standard digital insertion techniques of the ProSeal™ laryngeal mask airway: A prospective randomized study. BMC Anesthesiology. 2019;19:244. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-019-0915-3
62.Lingappan K, Arnold JL, Fernandes CJ, Pammi M. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in neonates. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018;6:CD009975. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009975.pub3
63.Myatra SN, Doctor JR. Use of videolaryngoscopy as a teaching tool for novices performing tracheal intubation results in greater first pass success in neonates and infants. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2019;63:781-783. DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_738_19
64.D’Antonio L, Lotz W, Chait D, Netsell R. Perceptual-physiologic approach to evaluation and treatment of dysphonia. The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology. 1987;96(2 Pt 1):187-190. DOI: 10.1177/000348948709600210
65.Vincent RD Jr, Wimberly MP, Brockwell RC, Magnuson JS. Soft palate perforation during orotracheal intubation facilitated by the GlideScope videolaryngoscope. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia. 2007;19:619-621. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2007.03.010
66.Malik AM, Frogel JK. Anterior tonsillar pillar perforation during GlideScope video laryngoscopy. Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2007;104:1610-1611. DOI: 10.1213/01.ane.0000264321.04403.06
67.Cooper RM. Complications associated with the use of the GlideScope videolaryngoscope. Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2007;54:54-57. DOI: 10.1007/BF03021900
68.Leong WL, Lim Y, Sia AT. Palatopharyngeal wall perforation during Glidescope intubation. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. 2008;36:870-874. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X0803600620
69.Greer D, Marshall KE, Bevans S, Standlee A, McAdams P, Harsha W. Review of videolaryngoscopy pharyngeal wall injuries. Laryngoscope. 2017;127:349-353. DOI: 10.1002/lary.26134
70.Saracoglu KT, Eti Z, Gogus FY. Airtraq optical laryngoscope: Advantages and disadvantages. Middle East Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2013;22:135-141
71.Bacon ER, Phelan MP, Doyle DJ. Tips and troubleshooting for use of the GlideScope video laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2015;33:1273-1277. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.05.003
72.GlideScope AVL 4-Step Technique. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jb2tbqQ6VQ [Accessed: 24 July 2020]
Written By
Tatjana Goranović
Submitted: 06 April 2020Reviewed: 27 July 2020Published: 12 September 2020
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
