Comparison of Airtraq® Laryngoscope, Bonfils Endoscope and Fiberoptic Bronchoscope for Awake Tracheal Intubation: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Abstract

Over the last decades several indirect laryngoscopes have been developed to provide a significant better glottic view and improved the success rate in difficult intubations. Some case reports describe the use of indirect laryngoscopes for awake tracheal intubations under preserved spontaneous breathing. However, randomized clinical studies comparing indirect laryngoscopy to the standard of fiberoptic intubation under spontaneous breathing are rare. Therefore, we compared the intubation with the Airtraq® laryngoscope and the Bonfils endoscope, to the standard fiberoptic intubation in patients with an expected difficult intubation under local anesthesia and sedation. 150 patients with an expected difficult intubation were randomized to one of the three devices. All intubation attempts were performed under local anesthesia and sedation. We evaluated success rate, time for intubation and the satisfaction of anesthesiologists and patients. Fiberoptic intubation was significantly more successful (100%) than intubation with an Airtraq® laryngoscope (88%) or the Bonfils endoscope (88%). Time for intubation was quickest with the Airtraq® laryngoscope and significantly shorter than fiberoptic intubation (p=0.044). There was no difference in satisfaction of the anesthesiologists and none of the patients had a negative recall to one of the techniques. An expected difficult intubation can be managed using the Airtraq® laryngoscope or the Bonfils endoscope in 88% and shows the same satisfaction of anesthesiologists and patient. We conclude that these techniques represent an acceptable alternative for an awake tracheal intubation under sedation and preserved spontaneous breathing.