↓ Skip to main content

Wiley Online Library

Videolaryngoscopy vs. fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Anaesthesia, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 3,483)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
332 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
Title
Videolaryngoscopy vs. fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Anaesthesia, April 2018
DOI 10.1111/anae.14299
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Alhomary, E. Ramadan, E. Curran, S. R. Walsh

Abstract

Awake fibreoptic intubation is often considered the technique of choice when a difficult airway is anticipated. However, videolaryngoscopes are being used more commonly. We searched the current literature and performed a meta-analysis to compare the use of videolaryngoscopy and fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation. Our primary outcome was the time needed to intubate the patient's trachea. Secondary outcomes included: failed intubation; the rate of successful intubation at the first attempt; patient-reported satisfaction with the technique; and any complications resulting from intubation. Eight studies examining 429 patients were included in this review. The intubation time was shorter when videolaryngoscopy was used instead of fibreoptic bronchoscopy (seven trials, 408 participants, mean difference (95%CI) -45.7 (-66.0 to -25.4) s, p < 0.0001, low-quality evidence). There was no significant difference between the two techniques in the failure rate (six studies, 355 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.01 (0.24-4.35), p = 0.99, low-quality evidence) or the first-attempt success rate (six studies, 391 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.01 (0.95-1.06), p = 0.8, moderate quality evidence). The level of patient satisfaction was similar between both groups. No difference was found in two reported adverse events: hoarseness/sore throat (three studies, 167 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.07 (0.62-1.85), p = 0.81, low-quality evidence), and low oxygen saturation (five studies, 337 participants, risk ratio (95%CI) 0.49 (0.22-1.12), p = 0.09, low-quality evidence). In summary, videolaryngoscopy for awake tracheal intubation is associated with a shorter intubation time. It also seems to have a success rate and safety profile comparable to fibreoptic bronchoscopy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 332 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 28%
Other 15 20%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Professor 4 5%
Other 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 84%
Unspecified 7 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 229. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 March 2019.
All research outputs
#57,981
of 13,807,706 outputs
Outputs from Anaesthesia
#27
of 3,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,870
of 273,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Anaesthesia
#3
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,807,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.