Effectiveness of intubation devices in patients with cervical spine immobilisation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
British Journal of Anaesthesia · 2021-02-17 · Meta-analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical spine immobilisation increases the difficulty of tracheal intubation. Many intubation devices have been evaluated in this setting, but their relative performance remains uncertain. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomised trials comparing two or more intubation devices in adults with cervical spine immobilisation. After critical appraisal, a random-effects network meta-analysis was used to pool and compare device performance. The primary outcome was the probability of first-attempt intubation success (first-pass success). For relative performance, the Macintosh direct laryngoscopy blade was chosen as the reference device. RESULTS: We included 80 trials (8039 subjects) comparing 26 devices. Compared with the Macintosh, McGrath™ (odds ratio [OR]=11.5; 95% credible interval [CrI] 3.19-46.20), C-MAC D Blade™ (OR=7.44; 95% CrI, 1.06-52.50), Airtraq™ (OR=5.43; 95% CrI, 2.15-14.2), King Vision™ (OR=4.54; 95% CrI, 1.28-16.30), and C-MAC™ (OR=4.20; 95% CrI=1.28-15.10) had a greater probability of first-pass success. This was also true for the GlideScope™ when a tube guide was used (OR=3.54; 95% CrI, 1.05-12.50). Only the Airway Scope™ had a better probability of first-pass success compared with the Macintosh when manual-in-line stabilisation (MILS) was used as the immobilisation technique (OR=7.98; 95% CrI, 1.06-73.00). CONCLUSIONS: For intubation performed with cervical immobilisation, seven devices had a better probability of first-pass success compared with the Macintosh. However, more studies using MILS (rather than a cervical collar or other alternative) are needed, which more accurately represent clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019158067 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=158067).
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Endotracheal intubation · Spinal motion restriction · Video laryngoscopy
Related articles
- Cervical spine movements during laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Emerg Med J, 2023)
- Comparison of video-stylet and video-laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in adults with cervical neck immobilisation: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. (Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med, 2021)
- Cervical spine motion during videolaryngoscopic intubation using a Macintosh-style blade with and without the anterior piece of a cervical collar: a randomized controlled trial. (Can J Anaesth, 2025)
- A comparison of McGrath MAC® and standard direct laryngoscopy in simulated immobilized cervical spine pediatric intubation: a manikin study. (Eur J Pediatr, 2017)
- Comparison of intubation success and glottic visualization using King Vision and C-MAC videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine injuries with cervical immobilization: A randomized clinical trial. (Surg Neurol Int, 2017)
- Comparison of tracheal intubation with the Airway Scope or Clarus Video System in patients with cervical collars. (Anaesthesia, 2011)