Abstract:We read with great interest the recent systematic review and meta-analysis by Huang et al1Huang H.B. Peng J.M. Xu B. Liu G.Y. Du B. Video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Chest. 2017; 152: 510-517Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (31) Google Scholar published in CHEST (September 2017) comparing performance of video and direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in adult patients in the ICU. They concluded that compared with direct laryngoscopy (DL), video laryngoscopy (VL) did not increase the first-attempt success rate, and their findings did not support the routine use of VL in patients in the ICU. In a meta-analysis, the results from many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are mathematically synthesized by complex statistical methods to evaluate the diversity among results and to estimate a common pooled effect with increased precision. Thus, the results of a meta-analysis are only as good as the quality of the collected data. Besides the limitations described in the Discussion section of Huang et al's1Huang H.B. Peng J.M. Xu B. Liu G.Y. Du B. Video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Chest. 2017; 152: 510-517Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (31) Google Scholar paper, we noted that some defects of the RCTs included in this meta-analysis would have made interpretation of their conclusions questionable. First, success with the application of any airway device probably will increase as experience is accumulated. Of five RCTs included in their analysis, none provided the exact definitions of the participants’ level of competence using VL and DL. Although all five studies required some training and practice with VL prior to enrollment of participants, the relative exposure is likely significantly less than the participants' prior experience with DL. This is particularly important, as the intubation technique with VL is different from that with DL.2Kelly F.E. Cook T.M. Seeing is believing: getting the best out of videolaryngoscopy.Br J Anaesth. 2016; 117: 9-13Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (68) Google Scholar Thus, possible differences in participants’ experience and competence with VL and DL would have biased the intubation outcomes in favor of DL. That is, the findings of these RCTs may only map the learning curve differences of participants for VL and DL but not provide the different efficiencies for the studied devices. Second, in this meta-analysis, three RCTs used the angulated video laryngoscopes (GlideScope; Verathon) and two mainly used the Macintosh-type video laryngoscopes (MCGRATH MAC; Covidien). In these studies, a laryngoscopy attempt was defined as each introduction of the laryngoscope into the oral cavity, and first-attempt success was used as an end point for performance comparison. It must be noted that the definition of a laryngoscopy attempt used in these studies is desirable for direct laryngoscopes and angulated video laryngoscopes but not for the Macintosh-type video laryngoscopes, such as the McGrath MAC video laryngoscope. A unique advantage of a Macintosh-type video laryngoscope is that it combines the benefits of DL and VL in one device.3Xue F.S. Liu Q.J. Li H.X. Liu Y.Y. Videolaryngoscopy assisted intubation—new era for airway management.J Anesth Perioper Med. 2016; 3: 258-269Crossref Google Scholar That is, when one option fails at the first attempt, the intubators can immediately switch to another option to successfully complete the intubation without having to make a second attempt. Furthermore, video laryngoscope designs are important for performance in different airway conditions; even a slight design modification may significantly change the success rate, intubation time, and use of adjunctive maneuvers.4Kleine-Brueggeney M. Greif R. Schoettker P. Salvodelli G. Nabecker S. Theiler L. Evaluation of six videolaryngoscopes in 720 patients with a simulated difficult airway—a multicentre randomised controlled trial.Br J Anaesth. 2016; 116: 670-679Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (123) Google Scholar Thus, pooling of results from studies evaluating different video laryngoscopes may lead to intrinsic inconsistencies in the primary end points. Third, the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs can improve first-attempt success for intubation in patients in the ICU.5Mosier J.M. Sakles J.C. Stolz U. et al.Neuromuscular blockade improves first-attempt success for intubation in the intensive care unit: a propensity matched analysis.Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015; 12: 734-741Crossref PubMed Scopus (49) Google Scholar Of five RCTs included in this paper, one did not routinely use neuromuscular blocking agents. The remaining four studies used neuromuscular blocking agents in most or all patients, but the choice of agent and dosage was inconsistent among studies, as they were determined by the individual performing the intubation. Because subgroup analysis according to the use of neuromuscular blocking agents was not performed in this review, a confused effect of this factor on common pooled results cannot be excluded. Finally, available evidence from surgical patients shows that the benefits of VL are most significant in patients with difficult airways, as it converts “blind” intubations into intubations under visual control.3Xue F.S. Liu Q.J. Li H.X. Liu Y.Y. Videolaryngoscopy assisted intubation—new era for airway management.J Anesth Perioper Med. 2016; 3: 258-269Crossref Google Scholar In this analysis, two RCTs clearly excluded patients with difficult airway predictors, and three of the studies did not state whether the incidence of difficult airways by preintubation airway assessment was comparable between VL and DL groups. As a result, an important question that cannot be answered by this analysis is whether VL equals or surpasses DL in patients in the ICU with difficult airways. Video Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults: A Systemic Review and Meta-AnalysisCHESTVol. 152Issue 3PreviewEndotracheal intubation (EI) in ICU patients is associated with an increased risk of life-threatening adverse events due to unstable conditions, rapid deterioration, limited preparation time, and variability in the expertise of operators. The goal of this study was to compare the effect of video laryngoscopy (VL) and direct laryngoscopy (DL) in ICU patients requiring EI. Full-Text PDF ResponseCHESTVol. 152Issue 4PreviewWe thank Dr Liu et al for their interest in our meta-analysis.1 We fully agree that operator experience might exert significant impact on performance for both direct laryngoscopy (DL) and video laryngoscopy (VL). In fact, all five trials included provided detailed, albeit different, definitions of the operator experience level (e-Table 1 of our article). Moreover, four of the five trials reported a first-pass success rate categorized by experience level and specialty. In addition, we have conducted a sensitivity analysis restricted to the experienced operators, with similar results. Full-Text PDF

Video Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Video versus direct laryngoscopy in critically ill patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Can Meta-Analysis Provide an Exact Comparison of Video and Direct Laryngoscopes for Intubation in Patients in the ICU? Response

Direct Laryngoscopy Versus Video Laryngoscopy for Intubation in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Trials*

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

Comparing the effectiveness and safety of videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in the paediatric emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Videolaryngoscopy in critically ill patients

Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Tracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy in achieving successful emergency endotracheal intubations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Can video laryngoscopy and supplemental oxygen redefine pediatric, infant and neonatal tracheal intubation standards?

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation in children (excluding neonates)

Video laryngoscopy is associated with improved first‐pass intubation success compared with direct laryngoscopy in emergency department trauma patients

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

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

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

Comparison of Efficacy of Intubation with HugeMed Non-channelled Video Laryngoscope, McCoy and Macintosh Laryngoscope in Simulated Difficult Laryngoscopy Using Rigid Cervical Collar: A Prospective Randomized Trial

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

Efficacy and safety of video laryngoscope in indwelling gastric tube in severe coma patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of Video Laryngoscope (VL) and Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway (I-LMA) for Endotracheal Intubation in a Manikin with Restricted Neck Motion

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