Abstract:Tracheal intubation is a common procedure performed to secure the airway in adults undergoing surgery or those who are critically ill. Intubation is sometimes associated with difficulties and complications that may result in patient harm. While it is traditionally achieved by performing direct laryngoscopy, the past three decades have seen the advent of rigid indirect videolaryngoscopes (VLs). A mounting body of evidence comparing the two approaches to tracheal intubation has been acquired over this period of time. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2016. To assess whether use of different designs of VLs in adults requiring tracheal intubation reduces the failure rate compared with direct laryngoscopy, and assess the benefits and risks of these devices in selected population groups, users and settings. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and Web of Science on 27 February 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and conducted forward and backward citation searches. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi‐RCTs with adults undergoing laryngoscopy performed with either a VL or a Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in any clinical setting. We included parallel and cross‐over study designs. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for the following outcomes: failed intubation, hypoxaemia, successful first attempt at tracheal intubation, oesophageal intubation, dental trauma, Cormack‐Lehane grade, and time for tracheal intubation. We included 222 studies (219 RCTs, three quasi‐RCTs) with 26,149 participants undergoing tracheal intubation. Most studies recruited adults undergoing elective surgery requiring tracheal intubation. Twenty‐one studies recruited participants with a known or predicted difficult airway, and an additional 25 studies simulated a difficult airway. Twenty‐one studies were conducted outside the operating theatre environment; of these, six were in the prehospital setting, seven in the emergency department and eight in the intensive care unit. We report here the findings of the three main comparisons according to videolaryngoscopy device type. We downgraded the certainty of the outcomes for imprecision, study limitations (e.g. high or unclear risks of bias), inconsistency when we noted substantial levels of statistical heterogeneity and publication bias. Macintosh‐style videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (61 studies, 9883 participants) We found moderate‐certainty evidence that a Macintosh‐style VL probably reduces rates of failed intubation (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 0.65; 41 studies, 4615 participants) and hypoxaemia (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.99; 16 studies, 2127 participants). These devices may also increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09; 42 studies, 7311 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and probably improve glottic view when assessed as Cormack‐Lehane grade 3 and 4 (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.48; 38 studies, 4368 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). We found little or no clear difference in rates of oesophageal intubation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.21; 14 studies, 2404 participants) but this finding was supported by low‐certainty evidence. We were unsure of the findings for dental trauma because the certainty of this evidence was very low (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.89; 18 studies, 2297 participants). We were not able to pool data for time required for tracheal intubation owing to considerable heterogeneity (I 2 = 96%). Hyperangulated videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy (96 studies, 11,438 participants) We found moderate‐certainty evidence that hyperangulated VLs probably reduce rates of failed intubation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; 63 studies, 7146 participants) and oesophageal intubation (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.81; 14 studies, 1968 participants). In subgroup analysis, we noted that hyperangulated VLs were more likely to reduce failed intubation when used on known or predicted difficult airways (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.48; P = 0.03 for subgroup differences; 15 studies, 1520 participants). We also found that these devices may increase rates of success on the first intubation attempt (RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.05; 66 studies, 8086 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and the glottic view is probably also improved (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.24; 54 studies, 6058 participants; data for Cormack‐Lehane grade 3/4 views; moderate‐certainty evidence). However, we found low‐certainty evidence of little or no clear difference in rates of hypoxaemia (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.11; 15 studies, 1691 participants), and the findings for dental trauma were unclear because the certainty of this evidence was very low (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.59; 30 studies, 3497 participants). We were not able to -Abstract Truncated-

Comparative Analysis of Hemodynamic Responses and Oropharyngeal Complications in Tracheal Intubation: Evaluating Conventional, Video, and Rigid Video Laryngoscopes Under General Anesthesia

Evaluation of the effects of five videolaryngoscopes in patients with a simulated difficult airway

The clinic observation of endotracheal intubation with discope intubating device versus macintosh direct laryngoscope in general anesthesia patients

Endotracheal Intubation under Video Laryngoscopic Guidance During Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgery in the Left Lateral Position

Comparison between the Lightwand and the Direct Laryngoscope during Oral Tracheal Intubation in Elderly Patients

Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Tracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults

Hemodynamic Changes Following Endotracheal Intubation in Patients Undergoing Cesarean Section With General Anesthesia: Application of Glidescope® Videolaryngoscope Versus Direct Laryngoscope

Evaluation of Endotracheal Intubation with a Flexible Fiberoptic Bronchoscope in Lateral Patient Positioning: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

[Comparison of five video laryngoscopes and conventional direct laryngoscopy : Investigations on simple and simulated difficult airways on the intubation trainer]

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Comparison of Optical Laryngoscope and the Ordinary Laryngoscope for Emergency Endotracheal Intubation

A Comparative Study Between Video Laryngoscope and Video Stylet for Tracheal Intubation in Patients With Simulated Cervical Fracture Injury: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Study

Comparative Evaluation of Direct Laryngoscopy Versus GlideScope for the Purpose of Laryngoscopy Management and Intubation in Candidates of Cesarean Delivery with General Anesthesia

Comparison of video-stylet and video-laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in adults with cervical neck immobilisation: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

[Clinical study of SMT-Ⅱ video laryngoscope with difficult airway intubation in emergency department]

Comparative evaluation of mcgrath MAC, Truview video laryngoscopes and Macintosh laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing surgery under general anaesthesia

The Comparison of Different Nasotracheal Intubation Methods for Patients with Predictable Difficult Airway

Video laryngoscopy may improve the intubation outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

A Comparison of a Standard Macintosh Blade Laryngoscope, Pentax-AWS Videolaryngoscope and Intubrite Videolaryngoscope for Tracheal Intubation in Manikins in Sitting and Prone Positions: A Randomized Cross-Over Study

Video Laryngoscopy vs Direct Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation in the Operating Room

Comparison of outcomes between video laryngoscopy and flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy for endotracheal intubation in adults with cervical neck immobilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials