Anaesthesia 2012, 67, 226–231
M. C. White, C. J. Marsh,2 R. M. Beringer, J. A. Nolan, A. Y. S. Choi, K. E. Medlock and D. G. Mason
Department of Anaesthetics, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children & John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
The authors conducted a randomised, controlled trial comparing the Airtraq with conventional laryngoscopy during routine anaesthesia in children. They hypothesised that the Airtraq laryngoscope would perform as well as conventional laryngoscopy.
Sixty patients (20 infants and 40 children) were recruited to the study and all children underwent successful intubation with both types of laryngoscope; however, tracheal intubation took longer using the Airtraq laryngoscope compared with the conventional laryngoscope, despite the better laryngeal view with the Airtraq in infants. Intubation took, on average, 20 s longer with the Airtraq, but whether this constitutes a clinically significant difference is a matter for debate.
Our study on the paediatric Airtraq provides level 1b evidence and we suggest that it should be available for use in routine practice in order that clinicians become familiar with its use before undertaking evaluation in a difficult airway setting.
Request a FREE on-site demonstration from a local Airtraq Sales Representative.