Airtraq versus GlideScope for tracheal intubation in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Surgical patient with tracheal intubation
- Registration Number
- JPRN-UMIN000036088
- Lead Sponsor
- Saitama Medical University Hospital
- Brief Summary
From the electronic databases, we selected 8 trials comprising 571 patients for review. Compared with the GlideScope, Airtraq did not improve success rate, glottic visualization, or intubation time in tracheal intubation. TSA showed that total sample size did not reach the required information size for all parameters.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Complete: follow-up complete
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 571
Inclusion Criteria
Not provided
Exclusion Criteria
We excluded trials involving manikins, tracheal intubation performed during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and the use of double-lumen tubes.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Others,meta-analysis etc
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Success rate, glottic visualization, and intubation time, oral pharyngeal injury
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method