Gökhan İNANGİL, Ömer BAKAL, Kadir Hakan CANSIZ, Fuat GÜRBÜZ, Fatma MERİH GÖKBEN, Hüseyin ŞEN

Kardiyovasküler cerrahi hastalarında GlideScope video laringoskop ve Macintosh laringoskopun endotrakeal entübasyona hemodinamik yanıtlarının karşılaştırılması

Amaç: Bu çalışmada kardiyovasküler cerrahi uygulanacak hastalarda GlideScope ve Macintosh laringoskop ile entübasyonun hemodinamik etkileri karşılaştırıldı. Çalışma planı: Çalışmaya toplam 74 hasta alındı ve hastalar GlideScope (n=37) ve Macintosh (n=37) olarak rastgele iki gruba ayrıldı. Laringoskopi süresi, kalp atım hızı, invaziv arteriyel basınç ve nabız-basınç çarpanı verileri indüksiyon başlangıcından laringoskopi sonrası beşinci dakikaya kadar 11 farklı zamanda kaydedildi. Bulgular: Yetmiş hasta çalışmayı tamamlayabildi. Entübasyon süreleri her iki grupta benzer olarak bulundu (14.1±4.0 saniye vs. 13.2±4.2 saniye; p=0.22). Kalp atım hızı, sistolik, diyastolik ve ortalama arter basınçları ve nabız-basınç çarpanı gibi hemodinamik veriler arasında tüm ölçüm noktalarında anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Laringoskopi süresi her iki grupta benzerdi. Sonuç: GlideScope video laringoskop kardiyovasküler cerrahi uygulanacak hastalarda Macintosh laringoskop ile karşılaştırıldığında hemodinamik olarak avantaj sağlamadığı görüldü.

Comparison of hemodynamic responses to endotracheal intubation with the GlideScope video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery

Background: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation using GlideScope and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery. Methods: A total of 74 patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups either a GlideScope (n=37) or a Macintosh laryngoscope (n=37). Laryngoscopy time, heart rate, invasive arterial pressure and rate pressure product were compared during induction and until five minutes after laryngoscopy at 11 time points.Results: Seventy patients completed the study. The intubation time was similar in both groups (14.1±4.0 sec vs. 13.2±4.2 sec; p=0.22). Hemodynamic values including heart rate, systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure and rate pressure product were similar at all-time points. The laryngoscopy time was also similar between groups.Conclusion: The GlideScope video laryngoscope did not show any advantage on hemodynamic response in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery when compared to Macintosh laryngoscope.

PDF

___

33. Nelson RR, Gobel FL, Jorgensen CR, Wang K, Wang Y, Taylor HL. Hemodynamic predictors of myocardial oxygen consumption during static and dynamic exercise. Circulation 1974;50:1179-89.
32. Pournajafian AR, Ghodraty MR, Faiz SH, Rahimzadeh P, Goodarzynejad H, Dogmehchi E. Comparing GlideScope Video Laryngoscope and Macintosh Laryngoscope Regarding Hemodynamic Responses During Orotracheal Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2014;16:12334.
31. Corda DM, Riutort KT, Leone AJ, Qureshi MK, Heckman MG, Brull SJ. Effect of jaw thrust and cricoid pressure maneuvers on glottic visualization during GlideScope videolaryngoscopy. J Anesth 2012;26:362-8.
30. Takahashi S, Mizutani T, Miyabe M, Toyooka H. Hemodynamic responses to tracheal intubation with laryngoscope versus lightwand intubating device (Trachlight) in adults with normal airway. Anesth Analg 2002;95:480-4.
29. Bucx MJ, van Geel RT, Scheck PA, Stijnen T. Cardiovascular effects of forces applied during laryngoscopy. The importance of tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia 1992;47:1029-33.
28. Kanchi M, Nair HC, Banakal S, Murthy K, Murugesan C. Haemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation in coronary artery disease: Direct versus video laryngoscopy. Indian J Anaesth 2011;55:260-5.
27. Malik MA, Subramaniam R, Maharaj CH, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Randomized controlled trial of the Pentax AWS, Glidescope, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in predicted difficult intubation. Br J Anaesth 2009;103:761-8.
26. Hirabayashi Y, Hiruta M, Kawakami T, Inoue S, Fukuda H, Saitoh K, et al. Effects of lightwand (Trachlight) compared with direct laryngoscopy on circulatory responses to tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 1998;81:253-5.
25. Siddiqui N, Katznelson R, Friedman Z. Heart rate/blood pressure response and airway morbidity following tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy, GlideScope and Trachlight: a randomized control trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2009;26:740-5.
24. Dashti M, Amini S, Azarfarin R, Totonchi Z, Hatami M. Hemodynamic changes following endotracheal intubation with glidescope(®) video-laryngoscope in patients with untreated hypertension. Res Cardiovasc Med 2014;3:17598.
23. Mahjoubifar M, Boroojeny SB. Hemodynamic changes during orotracheal intubation with the glidescope and direct laryngoscope. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2010;12:406-8.
22. Adachi YU, Takamatsu I, Watanabe K, Uchihashi Y, Higuchi H, Satoh T. Evaluation of the cardiovascular responses to fiberoptic orotracheal intubation with television monitoring: comparison with conventional direct laryngoscopy. J Clin Anesth 2000;12:503-8.
21. Sun DA, Warriner CB, Parsons DG, Klein R, Umedaly HS, Moult M. The GlideScope Video Laryngoscope: randomized clinical trial in 200 patients. Br J Anaesth 2005;94:381-4.
20. Xue FS, Zhang GH, Li XY, Sun HT, Li P, Li CW, et al. Comparison of hemodynamic responses to orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh direct laryngoscope. J Clin Anesth 2007;19:245-50.
19. Russell T, Khan S, Elman J, Katznelson R, Cooper RM. Measurement of forces applied during Macintosh direct laryngoscopy compared with GlideScope® videolaryngoscopy. Anaesthesia 2012;67:626-31.
18. Hashemian AM, Zamani Moghadam Doloo H, Saadatfar M, Moallem R, Moradifar M, Faramarzi R, et al. Effects of intravenous administration of fentanyl and lidocaine on hemodynamic responses following endotracheal intubation. Am J Emerg Med 2018;36:197-201.
17. Mendonça FT, de Queiroz LM, Guimarães CC, Xavier AC. Effects of lidocaine and magnesium sulfate in attenuating hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation: single-center, prospective, double-blind, randomized study. Braz J Anesthesiol 2017;67:50-6.
16. Yazıcıoğlu H, Özgök A, Balaban F, Doğanay B, Ünver S. Single dose esmolol attenuates bispectral index scale response to intubation during fentanyl-midazolam anesthesia for cardiac surgery. Turk Gogus Kalp Dama 2012;20:72-8.
15. Gümüş F, Şinikoğlu SN, Yektaş A, Polat A, Kayalar N, Eralp K, et al. Dexmedetomidine combined with narcotic anesthesia induction in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Turk Gogus Kalp Dama 2013;21:676-82.
14. Adachi YU, Satomoto M, Higuchi H, Watanabe K. Fentanyl attenuates the hemodynamic response to endotracheal intubation more than the response to laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg 2002;95:233-7.
13. Cooper RM, Pacey JA, Bishop MJ, McCluskey SA. Early clinical experience with a new videolaryngoscope (GlideScope) in 728 patients. Can J Anaesth 2005;52:191-8.
12. Rai MR, Dering A, Verghese C. The Glidescope system: a clinical assessment of performance. Anaesthesia 2005;60:60-4.
11. Kihara S, Brimacombe J, Yaguchi Y, Watanabe S, Taguchi N, Komatsuzaki T. Hemodynamic responses among three tracheal intubation devices in normotensive and hypertensive patients. Anesth Analg 2003;96:890-5.
10. Güzelmeriç F, Erdoğan HB, Koçak T. Anesthesiologic approach to cardiac emergencies. Turk Gogus Kalp Dama 2007;15:82-9.
9. Xue FS, Zhang GH, Liu J, Li XY, Yang QY, Xu YC, et al. The clinical assessment of Glidescope in orotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. Minerva Anestesiol 2007;73:451-7.
8. Malik MA, Maharaj CH, Harte BH, Laffey JG. Comparison of Macintosh, Truview EVO2, Glidescope, and Airwayscope laryngoscope use in patients with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth 2008;101:723-30.
7. Huang WT, Huang CY, Chung YT. Clinical comparisons between GlideScope video laryngoscope and Trachlight in simulated cervical spine instability. J Clin Anesth 2007;19:110-4.
6. Schälte G, Scheid U, Rex S, Coburn M, Fiedler B, Rossaint R, et al. The use of the Airtraq® optical laryngoscope for routine tracheal intubation in high-risk cardio-surgical patients. BMC Res Notes 2011;4:425.
5. Ezri T, Weisenberg M, Khazin V, Zabeeda D, Sasson L, Shachner A, et al. Difficult laryngoscopy: incidence and predictors in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery versus general surgery patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2003;17:321-4.
4. Kahl M, Eberhart LH, Behnke H, Sänger S, Schwarz U, Vogt S, et al. Stress response to tracheal intubation in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery: direct laryngoscopy versus an intubating laryngeal mask airway. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2004;18:275-80.
3. Kovac AL. Controlling the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation. J Clin Anesth 1996;8:63-79.
2. Shribman AJ, Smith G, Achola KJ. Cardiovascular and catecholamine responses to laryngoscopy with and without tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 1987;59:295-9.
1. Sameenakousar, Mahesh, Srinivasan KV. Comparison of fentanyl and clonidine for attenuation of the haemodynamic response to laryngocopy and endotracheal intubation. J Clin Diagn Res 2013;7:106-11.