Video laryngoscopy

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Overview

Hyperangulated blade and rigid stylet typical of the Glidescope video laryngoscope
The C-MAC video laryngoscope (pictured above) has a Macintosh or "standard geometry" blade similar to that of a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (pictured below)
  • Two most common devices are the C-MAC and the Glidescope
    • Both CMAC and Glidescope systems offer both hyperangulated and standard geometry blades
  • Increasingly utilized in emergency airway management[1]

Indications

Contraindications

  • No absolute contraindications
  • Relative:
    • Blood or emesis in airway
    • Foreign body removal

Equipment Needed

  • Video laryngoscope
  • Rigid stylet if hyperangulated blade is used
  • All other equipment necessary for endotracheal intubation

Procedure

  • Hyperangulated video laryngoscope
    • Patient ideally in neutral spine position (as opposed to "sniffing" position for direct laryngoscopy)
    • After induction, use right hand to "scissor" mouth open
    • Place hyperangulated blade midline and slowly advance with progressive identification of airway landmarks
    • Advance blade into vallecula
    • When cords fill entire screen (Cormack-Lehane Grade I), slightly retract laryngoscopy so that cords only occupy upper 1/3 of screen (CL Grade II, allows for passage of ETT with rigid stylet)[2]
      • If intubation is attempted with the best view possible, operators often have difficulty advancing the tube around the tongue and hypopharyngeal soft tissues
  • Standard geometry video laryngoscope
    • Same technique utilized with direct laryngoscopy
    • Can either visualize directly or utilize video screen for tube delivery

Complications

  • Risk of equipment failure with hyperangulated laryngoscope (unable to obtain direct view if screen fails)
  • Risk of camera contamination with blood or emesis in airway
  • Foreign body removal with hyperangulated laryngoscope less successful than with Macintosh laryngoscope [3]

See Also

Airway Pages

External Links

Videos

References

  1. Brown CA 3rd, Bair AE, Pallin DJ, Walls RM; NEAR III Investigators. Techniques, success, and adverse events of emergency department adult intubations [published correction appears in Ann Emerg Med. 2017 May;69(5):540]. Ann Emerg Med. 2015;65(4):363-370.e1. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2014.10.036
  2. Gu Y, Robert J, Kovacs G, et al. A deliberately restricted laryngeal view with the GlideScope® video laryngoscope is associated with faster and easier tracheal intubation when compared with a full glottic view: a randomized clinical trial. Une vue laryngée délibérément restreinte à l'aide du vidéolaryngoscope GlideScope® est associée à une intubation trachéale plus rapide et plus aisée qu'une vue glottique totale: une étude clinique randomisée. Can J Anaesth. 2016;63(8):928-937. doi:10.1007/s12630-016-0654-6
  3. Je, S. M., Kim, M. J., Chung, S. P., & Chung, H. S. (2012). Comparison of GlideScope® versus Macintosh laryngoscope for the removal of a hypopharyngeal foreign body: A randomized cross-over cadaver study. Resuscitation, 83(10), 1277–1280.