Search

Summary: Background: Different sedation regimens have been used to facilitate awake tracheal intubation, but the evidence has not been synthesised robustly, particularly with respect to clinically important outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and network meta‐analysis to determine the sedation techniques most likely to be associated with successful tracheal intubation, a shorter time to successful intubation and a lower risk of arterial oxygen desaturation. Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials of patients undergoing awake tracheal intubation for any indication and reporting: overall tracheal intubation success rate; tracheal intubation time; incidence of arterial oxygen desaturation; and other related outcomes. We performed a frequentist network meta‐analysis for these outcomes if two or more sedation regimens were compared between included trials. We also performed a sensitivity analysis excluding trials with a high risk of bias. Results: In total, 48 studies with 2837 patients comparing 33 different regimens were included. Comparing overall awake tracheal intubation success rates (38 studies, 2139 patients), there was no evidence suggesting that any individual sedation regimen was superior. Comparing times to successful tracheal intubation (1745 patients, 24 studies), any sedation strategy was superior to placebo. When we excluded trials with a high risk of bias, we found no evidence of a difference between any interventions for time to successful tracheal intubation. Thirty‐one studies (1753 patients) suggested that dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulphate were associated with a reduced risk of arterial oxygen desaturation compared with other interventions, but excluding trials with a high risk of bias suggested no relevant differences between interventions. The quality of evidence for each of our outcomes was low. Conclusions: To maximise effective and safe awake tracheal intubation, optimising oxygenation, topical airway anaesthesia and procedural performance may have more impact than any given sedation regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Videolaryngoscopy is a suitable alternative to flexible bronchoscopy to facilitate awake tracheal intubation. The relative effectiveness of these techniques in clinical practice is unknown. We compared flexible nasal bronchoscopy with Airtraq® videolaryngoscopy in patients with an anticipated difficult airway scheduled for awake tracheal intubation. Patients were allocated randomly to flexible nasal bronchoscopy or videolaryngoscopy. All procedures were performed with upper airway regional anaesthesia blockade and a target‐controlled intravenous infusion of remifentanil. The success rate with the allocated technique was the primary outcome. A non‐inferiority analysis with a predefined limit of 8% was planned. Seventy‐eight patients were recruited, allocated randomly and analysed. The rate of successful intubation was 97% and 82% in the flexible bronchoscopy and videolaryngoscopy groups, respectively, p = 0.032. The median (IQR [range]) time to tracheal intubation was shorter with the Airtraq, 163 (105–332 [40–1004]) vs. 217 (180–364 [120–780]) s, p = 0.030. There were no significant differences for complications found between the groups. The median visual analogue scale for ease of intubation was 8 (7–9 [0–10]) for Airtraq vs. 8 (7–9 [0–10]) for flexible bronchoscopy, p = 0.710. The median visual analogue scale for patient comfort for Airtraq was 8 (6–9 [2–10]) vs. 8 (7–9 [3–10]) for flexible bronchoscopy, p = 0.370. The Airtraq videolaryngoscope is not non‐inferior to flexible bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation in a clinical setting when awake tracheal intubation is indicted. It may be a suitable alternative when judged on a case‐by‐case basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Newer modalities for asleep airway management such as videolaryngoscopes and supraglottic airway devices have further advanced safe airway management but have not replaced awake tracheal intubation. However, time itself should not be the determining factor in cases where awake tracheal intubation is considered the safest approach, and the alternative, tracheal intubation attempt after induction of anaesthesia in a predicted difficult airway patient may well take longer, and bears the concomitant increased risk of having to revert to emergency front-of-neck access. It seems prudent to consider the nature of the pathology in these patients and come to a reassurance that asleep airway management is safe before induction of anaesthesia, and if not, then choose awake tracheal intubation. Yes, awake tracheal intubation with FB or VL may be difficult, or impossible, in the bleeding patient, but if the airway examination indicates an anatomically difficult airway then an awake approach, either awake tracheal intubation or awake front-of-neck access, is definitively as indicated as it would have been had the airway not been bleeding - or even more so [13]. [Extracted from the article]

Airway management in patients with periglottic tumour is a high-risk procedure with potentially serious consequences. There is no consensus on how best to secure the airway in this group of patients. We conducted a feasibility study of awake tracheal intubation using a King Vision® videolaryngoscope with a channelled blade in a cohort of 25 patients, with a periglottic tumour requiring diagnostic or radical surgery. We used 10% and 4% lidocaine to topicalise the airway and midazolam and remifentanil for sedation. We recorded the success rate, number of attempts, time to obtain glottic view, time to intubation and complications. Twenty-three of the 25 patients (92%, 95%CI 75-98%) were intubated with the awake videolaryngoscope-assisted technique, with 17/23 (74%, 95%CI 54-87%) intubations achieved at the first attempt. Five patients required two and one patient, three attempts at intubation. Two patients (8%, 95%CI 2-25%) could not tolerate the procedure due to inadequate topical anaesthesia. Median (IQR [range]) times to obtain glottic view and to intubate were 19 (17-22 [10-30]) s and 49 (42-71 [33-107]) s, respectively. Traces of blood in the airway were observed in 4/25 (16%, 95%CI 6-35%) patients. Although airway management in this group of patients was expected to be difficult, successful awake intubation with the King Vision videolaryngoscope was achieved in the majority of patients within less than a minute. This study highlights a number of potential advantages of awake videolaryngoscope-assisted intubation over other awake methods of securing the airway in patients with upper airway obstruction due to periglottic mass. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Videolaryngoscopy is a suitable alternative to flexible bronchoscopy to facilitate awake tracheal intubation. The relative effectiveness of these techniques in clinical practice is unknown. We compared flexible nasal bronchoscopy with Airtraq ® videolaryngoscopy in patients with an anticipated difficult airway scheduled for awake tracheal intubation. Patients were allocated randomly to flexible nasal bronchoscopy or videolaryngoscopy. All procedures were performed with upper airway regional anaesthesia blockade and a target-controlled intravenous infusion of remifentanil. The success rate with the allocated technique was the primary outcome. A non-inferiority analysis with a predefined limit of 8% was planned. Seventy-eight patients were recruited, allocated randomly and analysed. The rate of successful intubation was 97% and 82% in the flexible bronchoscopy and videolaryngoscopy groups, respectively, p = 0.032. The median (IQR [range]) time to tracheal intubation was shorter with the Airtraq, 163 (105-332 [40-1004]) vs. 217 (180-364 [120-780]) s, p = 0.030. There were no significant differences for complications found between the groups. The median visual analogue scale for ease of intubation was 8 (7-9 [0-10]) for Airtraq vs. 8 (7-9 [0-10]) for flexible bronchoscopy, p = 0.710. The median visual analogue scale for patient comfort for Airtraq was 8 (6-9 [2-10]) vs. 8 (7-9 [3-10]) for flexible bronchoscopy, p = 0.370. The Airtraq videolaryngoscope is not non-inferior to flexible bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation in a clinical setting when awake tracheal intubation is indicted. It may be a suitable alternative when judged on a case-by-case basis., (© 2023 Association of Anaesthetists.)

We compared awake fibreoptic intubation with awake intubation using the Pentax Airway Scope(®) in 40 adult patients. Sedation was achieved using a target-controlled remifentanil infusion of 1-5 ng.ml(-1) and midazolam. The airway was anaesthetised with lidocaine spray and gargle. The total procedure time - a composite of sedation time, topical anaesthesia time and intubation time - was recorded. The operator's impression of the ease of the procedure and the patients' reported comfort were recorded on a 0-100 mm visual analogue scale. The median (IQR [range]) for total procedure time was 900 (739-1059 [616-1215]) s with the fibrescope and 651 (601-720 [498-900]) s with the Pentax Airway Scope (p = 0.0001). The median (IQR [range]) intubation time was 420 (283-480 [120-608]) s with the fibrescope and 183 (144-220 [107-420]) s with the Pentax Airway Scope (p = 0.0002). The median (IQR [range]) visual analogue scores for the operator's ease of intubation for the fibrescope and Pentax Airway Scope were 83.6 (72.0-98.0 [49.0-100.0]) and 86.8 (84.0-91.0 [61.0-100.0]), respectively (p = 0.3507). The median (IQR [range]) visual analogue score for patient comfort was 85.5 (81.0-97.0 [69.0-100.0]) and 79.4 (74.0-85.0 [59.0-100.0]) for the fibrescope and Pentax Airway Scope, respectively (p = 0.06). Total procedure time was significantly shorter with the Pentax Airway Scope compared with the fibrescope, with no difference in procedure difficulty or patient discomfort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compared the Enk Fiberoptic Atomizer Set(™) with boluses of topical anaesthesia administered via the working channel during awake fibreoptic tracheal intubation in 96 patients undergoing elective surgery. Patients who received topical anaesthesia via the atomiser, compared with boluses via the fibreoptic scope, reported a better median (IQR [range]) level of comfort: 1 (1-3 [1-10]) vs. 4 (2-6 [1-10]), p < 0.0001; experienced a reduced total number of coughs: 6 (3-10 [0-34]) vs. 11 (6-13 [0-25]), p = 0.0055; and fewer distinct coughing episodes: 7% vs. 27% respectively, p = 0.0133. The atomiser technique was quicker: 5 (3-6 [2-12]) min vs. 6 (5-7 [2-15]) min, p = 0.0009; and required less topical lidocaine: 100 mg (100-100 [80-160]) vs. 200 mg (200-200 [200-200]), p < 0.0001. Four weeks after nasal intubation, the incidence of nasal pain was less in the atomiser group compared with the control group (8% vs. 50%, p = 0.0015). We conclude that the atomiser was superior to bolus application for awake fibreoptic tracheal intubation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Airway management in patients with periglottic tumour is a high-risk procedure with potentially serious consequences. There is no consensus on how best to secure the airway in this group of patients. We conducted a feasibility study of awake tracheal intubation using a King Vision ® videolaryngoscope with a channelled blade in a cohort of 25 patients, with a periglottic tumour requiring diagnostic or radical surgery. We used 10% and 4% lidocaine to topicalise the airway and midazolam and remifentanil for sedation. We recorded the success rate, number of attempts, time to obtain glottic view, time to intubation and complications. Twenty-three of the 25 patients (92%, 95%CI 75-98%) were intubated with the awake videolaryngoscope-assisted technique, with 17/23 (74%, 95%CI 54-87%) intubations achieved at the first attempt. Five patients required two and one patient, three attempts at intubation. Two patients (8%, 95%CI 2-25%) could not tolerate the procedure due to inadequate topical anaesthesia. Median (IQR [range]) times to obtain glottic view and to intubate were 19 (17-22 [10-30]) s and 49 (42-71 [33-107]) s, respectively. Traces of blood in the airway were observed in 4/25 (16%, 95%CI 6-35%) patients. Although airway management in this group of patients was expected to be difficult, successful awake intubation with the King Vision videolaryngoscope was achieved in the majority of patients within less than a minute. This study highlights a number of potential advantages of awake videolaryngoscope-assisted intubation over other awake methods of securing the airway in patients with upper airway obstruction due to periglottic mass., (© 2016 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.)