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-

A comparison of the McGrath videolaryngoscope with direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation in the operating theatre: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Evaluation of the McGrath MAC and Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in 2000 patients undergoing general anaesthesia: the randomised multicentre EMMA trial study protocol

A Comparison of McGrath Videolaryngoscope versus Macintosh Laryngoscope for Nasotracheal Intubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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

Randomized comparison of McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope, Pentax Airway Scope, and Macintosh direct laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation in patients with manual in-line stabilization

Comparison of McGrath, Pentax, and Macintosh laryngoscope in normal and cervical immobilized manikin by novices: a randomized crossover trial

Comparative study of the McGrathTM videolaryngoscope blades and conventional laryngoscopy efficacy during mechanical chest compressions: Insights from a randomized trial with 90 anesthesiologists on objective and subjective parameters

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

Comparative study of the McGrath™ videolaryngoscope blades and conventional laryngoscopy efficacy during mechanical chest compressions: Insights from a randomized trial with 90 anesthesiologists on objective and subjective parameters

Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adults undergoing tracheal intubation.

Impact of universal use of the McGrath videolaryngoscope as the first option for all intubations in the operating room: The multicentre prospective before-after VIDEOLAR-SURGERY study protocol

Hyperangulated vs. Macintosh videolaryngoscopy in adults with anticipated difficult airway management: a randomised controlled trial

Comparison of conventional C-MAC video laryngoscope guided intubation by anesthesia trainees with and without Frova endotracheal introducer: A randomized clinical trial

Comparison of fibre-optic-guided endotracheal intubation through a supraglottic airway device versus hyperangulated video laryngoscopy by emergency physicians: A randomised controlled study in cadavers

Comparison of the novel VieScope with conventional and video laryngoscope in a difficult airway scenario - a randomized, controlled simulation trial

Comparison of the C-MAC D-blade video laryngoscope and the McCoy laryngoscope for double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation: A prospective randomized controlled study

Direct vs. Video-Laryngoscopy for Intubation by Paramedics of Simulated COVID-19 Patients under Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Tracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults

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

A comparison of the Macintosh laryngoscope, McGrath video laryngoscope, and Pentax Airway Scope in paediatric nasotracheal intubation

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing the Standard Mcintosh Laryngoscope and the C-Mac D blade Video laryngoscope™ for Double Lumen Tube Insertion for One Lung Ventilation in Onco surgical Patients