EVO2 Laryngoscope Research Articles

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TRUVIEW EVO2 LARYNGOSCOPE WITH MACINTOSH LARYNGOSCOPE FOR LARYNGOSCOPY AND INTUBATION IN ADULTS RECEIVING GENERAL ANAESTHESIA FOR ELECTIVE SURGERIES

INTRODUCTION: Though macintosh laryngoscope is a standard for intubation, new laryngoscopes are being introduced to reduce the disadvantages of macintosh. Trueview EVO2 laryngoscope has some advantages over macintosh laryngoscope. MATERIALAND METHODS: For this randomized, prospective study, 60 patients were allocated to either of the two groups and laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation done in Group A by macintosh laryngoscope and in Group B by truview EVO2 laryngoscope. The time taken for intubation, number of intubation attempts, POGO score., Cormack-lehane grading, rescue technique for intubation, haemodynamics and side effects were studied RESULTS: POGO score of 100% was seen in maximum number of patients in group B compared to group A. Cormack lehane grade I was seen in maximum number of patients in group B Number of attempts taken were more in group B and statistically signicant. Rescue technique like use of bougie, external pressure were used more in group A compared to group B. Mean time for laryngeal intubation was more in group B compared to group A. Haemodynamics were comparable between the groups. Minor complications seen and they were comparable. CONCLUSION: Truview EV02 laryngoscopy is associated with improved view of glottis , stable hemodynamic parameters, less complications but at the cost of longer intubation time and increase number of attempts compared to Macintosh laryngoscope .

A randomised comparative study of “videoendoscope” with the Truview EVO2, C-MAC D blade videolaryngoscope and the Macintosh laryngoscope

Background and Aims:Videolaryngoscopes are crucial components of a difficult airway cart. Issues of cost and availability, however, remain a problem. We compared the combination of an endoscope used in conjunction with the Macintosh laryngoscope with established videolaryngoscopes and the Macintosh laryngoscope using the intubation difficulty scale (IDS) score.Materials and Methods:A prospective randomised study including 120 adult patients, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I–III, with an anticipated difficult airway scheduled for elective surgery were randomly allocated to one of four groups: Truview EVO2 (group 1), C-MAC D Blade (group 2), videoendoscope (group 3), or Macintosh laryngoscope (group 4). The IDS score was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Cormack–Lehane grade, time to tracheal intubation, haemodynamic responses, and adverse events.Results:A significant proportion of patients in groups 2 and 3 had an IDS score of zero (73.3 and 70%, respectively). IDS scores were significantly lower in the C-MAC D blade and videoendoscope groups attributable to differences in parameters N4, N5 and N6 [C/L grades, lifting force and laryngeal pressure required] (P < 0.001). The C-MAC D blade and the Macintosh laryngoscope required less time for intubation as compared to the Truview EVO2 and videoendoscope. No differences were noted in post-intubation haemodynamic parameters and other adverse events.Conclusion:The performance of videoendoscope was comparable to C-MAC D Blade and superior to Truview EVO2 and Macintosh laryngoscope with respect to the IDS score and may thereby provide an effective alternative to commercial videolaryngoscopes in low resource settings.

Comparative evaluation of Truview evo2 and Macintosh laryngoscope for ease of orotracheal intubation in children - A prospective randomized controlled trial.

Background and Aims:Truview evo2 has been found to improve the glottic view when compared with the Miller blade in pediatric population. However, there is limited literature comparing it with Macintosh laryngoscope in children. We thus aimed to assess and compare Truview evo2 with the Macintosh laryngoscope for orotracheal intubation in children with regards to time to intubate, laryngoscopic view, ease of intubation, and associated hemodynamic changes.Material and Methods:Fifty ASA I-II children aged 2–8 years for elective surgery requiring general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation participated in this prospective randomized-controlled study. They were randomly allocated to two groups. In group-M (N = 25), laryngoscopy and intubation were performed using Macintosh laryngoscope, and in group-T (N = 25), Truview evo2 laryngoscope was used. Modified Cormack–Lehane grade, time to intubation, intubation difficulty score (IDS), and hemodynamic changes were compared between the groups. Data were analyzed using SPSS statistical software version 17 and P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:CL grade 1 was found in a larger number of patients of group-T (P = 0.003) and CL grades2a and 2b were found in a larger number of patients of group-M (P = 0.023 and P = 0.037, respectively). The mean time to intubation was significantly longer in group-T (19.0 ± 3.4 seconds) than in group-M (13.1 ± 2.1 seconds), P = 0.00. The over all IDS was lower in group-T than group M [i.e. median (IQR): 0 (0-0) vs 1 (0-2), respectively]. Heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and oxygen saturation were comparable between the groups at all times.Conclusion:Truview evo2 provides better laryngeal view and has a lesser IDS, but takes longer for intubation, when compared to the Macintosh laryngoscope in children.

Comparison of infant intubation through the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscope by paramedics during simulated infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A randomized crossover manikin study

IntroductionThe aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with and without chest compressions (CCs) by paramedics in an infant manikin model. MethodsThis was an open, prospective, randomized, simulated trial. After a brief didactic session, 78 volunteer paramedics attempted to intubate a manikin using TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscopes during resuscitation with and without CC scenarios. Primary end point was intubation success rate and secondary was time to intubation with each device. Glottic view using a Cormack-Lehane grade in using each device was also assessed. ResultsIn scenario with uninterrupted CCs, the median time to intubation using the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller varied with the times being 25.3 seconds (interquartile range [IQR], 23-30.5 seconds) vs 20.2 seconds (IQR, 18-23 seconds) vs 24.4 seconds (IQR, 21-28 seconds), respectively. The overall success rate of intubation during CC for the devices were 94.9% vs 100% vs 92.1%. During intubation without CC, median time to intubation varied and amounted to 24.9 seconds (IQR, 21-29.6 seconds) for TruView EVO2, 18.3 seconds (IQR, 16-21.3 seconds) for TruView PCD, and 19.4 seconds (IQR, 17-23.3 seconds) for Miller laryngoscope. The overall success rate of intubation without CC for all devices was 100%. ConclusionsFor infant tracheal intubation with TruView PCD, when used by paramedics, the malleable TruView PCD showed shorter intubation time and higher overall success rate in a simulated CC scenario than TruView EVO2 or Miller laryngoscopes. Further clinical studies are necessary to confirm these initial positive findings.

Observation of the effect of TruviewTM EVO2 laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation

Objective To evaluate the value of TruviewTM EVO2 optical laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation in the clinical application. Methods Forty-four patients in need for emergency endotracheal intubation were randomly （ random number） divided into two groups： the observation group （TruviewTM EVO2 optical laryngoscope for tracheal intubation, n = 22 ） and the control group （ordinary laryngoscope for tracheal intubation, n = 22 ）. Parameters recordered included C/L （Cormack-Lehane） grade, the time taken for successful intubation, tracheal intubation times, lowerest SpO2 during the intubation and the incidences of complications after intubation. IDS （ intubation difficulty scale ） scores were calculated and the total effective rates were compared. Results The data showed that there were no significant differences in the duration of the successful endotracheal intubation attempts between the two groups, respectively （24.04 ± 6.56） s and （21.97 ± 8.92） s, P 〉 0.05. The C/L grade with the observation group was 10： 9： 3：0 （ Ⅰ ： Ⅱ ： Ⅲ ： Ⅳ ）, which was significantly better than that with the control group （ 3： 7： 9： 3, P 〈 0.01 ）. The tracheal intubation times of the observation group was 17： 5：0 （ one time： two times： three times）, which was significantly better than that of the control group （ 9： 8： 5, P 〈 0, 01 ）. The. minimum of Sp02 in the observatign ,grqup （97. 3l ± 1.64） % was significantly higher than that in the control group （92.03 ± 5.39） % , （P 〈 0. 01 ）. The incidence of complications after intubation was lower in the observation group. The IDS score in the observation group （0. 68 ±0. 38） was much lower than those in the control group （ 2. 54 ±1.49）, （ P 〈 0. 01 ）. In addition, the total effective rate of the observation group （86. 36% ） was significantly higer than that in the control group （45.45%）, （P 〈 0. 01 ）. Conclusions Using optical laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation could facilitate the glottis exposure and reduce C/L grade effectively. It could lead to lower the incidence of complications andincrease the success rate of tracheal intubation. Key words: TruviewTMEV02 laryngoscope ; Ordinary laryngoscope ; Emergency tracheal intubation ; C/L grade; IDS grade

Role of the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope in the airway management of elective surgical patients: A comparison with the Macintosh laryngoscope

Background:The Truview EVO2(C) laryngoscope (TL) is a recently introduced optical device designed to provide an unmagnified anterior image of the glottic opening and allow indirect laryngoscopy.Aim:This study is designed to determine whether the TL is a better alternative to the Macintosh laryngoscope (ML) for routine endotracheal intubations in patients with usual airway characteristics.Methods:We compared the Truview EVO2(C) and MLs in 140 elective surgical patients requiring general anaesthesia and intubation in a prospective crossover fashion. The two blades were compared in terms of Cormack and Lehane grades, time required for intubation, anaesthetists’ assessment of ease of intubation, intubation difficulty score, attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy. The Student t test and Chi-square test were used to determine the statistical significance of parametric data and categorical data, respectively.Results:The Truview EVO2(C) blade provided a better laryngoscopic view than the Macintosh blade as suggested by improved Cormack and Lehane grades (in 48 patients), but required a longer time for intubation than the Macintosh blade (34.1 vs. 22.4 s), i.e., an improved view at the cost of longer mean intubation time. In spite of lower intubation difficulty scores, Truview EVO2(C) was considered as difficult to use on subjective assessment by the anaesthesiologist when compared with Macintosh. There was no difference observed between the two groups in attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy.Conclusion:We opine that although Truview provides a better laryngoscopic view than Macintosh in difficult cases, it does not have an extra benefit over Macintosh otherwise, further indicating the need for more experience with the use of a Truview laryngoscope.

A comparison of Truview EVO2 laryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope in routine airway management: A randomized crossover clinical trial

Background:The Truview EVO2 blade facilitates the view of vocal cords by indirect laryngoscopy and does not require the proper alignment of the oral, pharyngeal and tracheal axes as with the Macintosh blade.Methods:In a crossover fashion, we prospectively compared the view obtained at laryngoscopy with Truview EVO2 and the Macintosh blade in 110 adult patients of either sex between the age of 18 and 60 years, who were scheduled to undergo general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation. The patients were intubated with the second laryngoscope. The preoperative airway variables, laryngoscopic view, difficulty of intubation scale (IDS) score, duration of intubation, and degree of difficulty percentage of glottic opening (POGO score) of use with each laryngoscope were compared.Results:The IDS score was low and comparable between the two laryngoscopes. The laryngeal view was easy; Modified Cormack Lehane (MCL) grade 2a or less in 98.14% of the cases with the Truview laryngoscope compared to 78.7% of the cases with the Macintosh laryngoscope. Nineteen patients of MCL grade 3, one patient of grade 2b, and seven patients of grade 2a view with the Macintosh laryngoscope had MCL grade 1 view with the Truview laryngoscope. The duration of intubation was comparable between Truview and Macintosh laryngoscopes (12.1±3.8 s vs. 10.9±2.1 s).Conclusion:Truview laryngoscope performed comparably to Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with normal airway; however, the Truview laryngoscope may be a better option in difficult airway situations when the Macintosh blade fails to show the glottic opening.

Comparison of Macintosh and Truview EVO2 laryngoscope usage in adult patients who undergoing cervical disc surgery

Comparison of Macintosh and Truview EVO2 laryngoscope usage in adult patients who undergoing cervical disc surgery

Evaluation of the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation

Background:The Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope, with its unique optical lens system and blade tip angulation, has proved its usefulness in providing adequate laryngeal exposure and intubation via the oral route. However, the same has not been evaluated for nasotracheal intubation.Aim:We evaluated the suitability of the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation.Methods:Fifty ASA grade I and II elective surgical patients were studied. Patients aged below 15 years or having difficult airway were excluded. Under standard anesthesia protocol, nasotracheal intubation was performed using a Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope and, in cases of inability to complete intubation in three attempts, the Macintosh laryngoscope was used. Time taken for intubation, use of Magill's forceps and need for optimization maneuvers were noted. The primary outcome was percentage of successful intubation, while hemodynamic changes and duration of intubation were taken as secondary outcomes.Results:Majority (94%) could be intubated successfully with the Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope. Average time taken for intubation was 50.1 s. The hemodynamic changes were not clinically significant. Regression analysis revealed lack of association between duration of intubation and hemodynamic changes. There were no serious complications.Conclusion:The Truview™ EVO2 laryngoscope is a useful tool in performing nasotracheal intubation, ensuring a high level of success rate among patients with normal airway anatomy.

A possible explanation for cricoid pressure to improve the laryngeal view with the Truview Evo2™ laryngoscope

To the Editor, In a randomized clinical trial, Kumar et al. showed that the application of cricoid pressure (CP) improved the laryngeal view with a Truview Evo2 laryngoscope (TEL) without altering the ease of tracheal intubation. However, the authors did not specify the size of blade used in their study. The TEL blade is available in two adult sizes with lengths of 129 mm and 143 mm, and proper functioning of the TEL may depend on using a blade of an appropriate length. Similarly, the authors made no mention of an attempt to standardize the lifting force of the laryngoscope. Increased lifting force can alter the resultant laryngeal view, and this increase can occur in response to a poor view without the laryngoscopist even being aware. We suggest an alternative explanation why CP can improve the laryngeal view with the TEL. In patients with normal and difficult airways, the TEL has been shown to provide a better laryngeal view than the Macintosh laryngoscope due to its tubular optical system that provides an unmagnified laryngeal view at a 42 anterior refracted angle. However, the manufacturer’s description specifies that the upper refracted line of sight of the device’s optical system passes just below the blade tip (www.truphatek.com) (Figure, Panel A). That is, during tracheal intubation with the TEL, the blade tip can always be seen. Actually, the visual field obtained by the tubular optical system of the device cannot cover the blade tip, resulting in a blind area below the blade tip. Measurements, as shown in the Figure 1 (Panel B), show that the blind area below the blade tip of the device’s tubular optical system is 2, 4, 7, 9, and 11 mm in size 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 blades, respectively. This makes it difficult to visualize what is happening at the blade tip during tracheal intubation, perhaps because there is a relatively large anterior curve between the distal portion and the tip of the blade. Furthermore, a similar flaw has been found in the GlideScope videolaryngoscope, which also has an accentuated curve on its blade. The visual field obtained by the tubular optical system of the TEL includes only the glottis without the surroundings. The length of the adult glottis is about 23 mm in males and 17 mm in females. Thus, when an adult blade (size 3 or 4) is used, a 9-11 mm blind spot below the blade tip can undoubtedly interfere with the laryngeal exposure with the device (Figure 1, Panel C). Moreover, this issue may be especially significant in patients with their larynx in a more anterior position, as it requires a visual field in a more anterior direction. Nevertheless, when the external force of the CP results in a downward movement of the larynx, the upper part of the glottis, which cannot be seen, will be moved out of the blind spot, and the TEL will provide an improved laryngeal view. With a gentle lifting force of the TEL, perhaps the favourable effect of the CP on the laryngeal view will be more apparent. In practice, both external laryngeal pressure and CP have previously been used with this device as optimization maneuvers to aid laryngeal exposure and tracheal intubation in adult patients. In summary, the TEL appears to have a blind spot below its blade tip, and external laryngeal pressure or CP may be used with this device to improve the laryngeal view during laryngoscopy. F. S. Xue, MD (&) Y. J. Yuan, MD J. H. Liu, MD Plastic Surgery Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People’s Republic of China e-mail: fruitxue@yahoo.com.cn

Cricoid Pressure Improves Glottic View with Truview EVO2 Laryngoscope

The Truview EVO2 laryngoscope has a steel blade that incorporates a telescope-like optical device to provide an indirect view of the vocal cords. A

Comparing the performance of traditional direct laryngoscope with three indirect laryngoscopes: A prospective manikin study in normal and difficult airway scenarios

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of three indirect laryngoscopes, Truview EVO2 laryngoscope, Clarus Levitan fiberoptic stylet and AirwayScope AWS, in comparison with direct Macintosh laryngoscope (ML) when performed in normal and difficult airway scenarios. This prospective comparative study recruited 30 emergency physicians familiar with direct laryngoscopic intubation. Intubations were performed on manikin and were repeated twice for both scenarios. The primary end points were intubation time and rate of failed intubation. Glottis visualization was graded on Cormack and Lehane score and VAS. In normal airway scenario: AWS had shortest intubation time (6.0 s) followed by ML (8.7 s); VAS score of ML and AWS was lower (easier to use) than the other two devices; Cormack and Lehane score was similar for all devices. In difficult airway scenario: AWS had shortest intubation time (5.9 s); VAS score of AWS was lower than the other three devices; TVL, FOS, AWS had better Cormack and Lehane score than ML. Intubation time, rate of failed intubation, and Cormack and Lehane score were similar between attempts in both scenarios. Learning effect was significant in FOS in both scenarios and in TVL in normal airway scenario. AWS performed best in normal and difficult airways. ML performed better than TVL and FOS in normal airways. Performances of ML, TVL and FOS were similar in difficult airways. Skills with AWS could be mastered rapidly. TVL and FOS required more practice to gain expertise.

Comparison of optical laryngoscope and the ordinary laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and advantage of the TruviewTM EVO2(R) optical laryngoscope in comparison with the commonly used laryngoscope for the endotracheal intubation in patients in the emergency setting. Method Thirty-six patients in need for emergency endotracheal intubation in our hospital from February to May 2009 were randomly assigned to give intubation by using a TruviewTM EVO2(R) optical laryngoscope (T group) or a commonly used laryngoscope(R group). Cormack and Lehane laryngoscope grade (the degree of exposure of glottis by using laryngoscope), IDS (Intubation Difficulty Scale) score, the time taken for successful intubation, lowest SpO2 and the complication during intubation were essential factors for comparison between two groups. Results Our data showed that there was no difference in duration of the successful endotracheal intubation attempts between these two groups (respectively 22.73 ± 7.66 s and 19.91 ± 8.03 s, P ＞ 0. 05). However, the glottis exposure condition was significantly improved with TruviewTM EVO2(R) optical laryngoscope (P ＜ 0.01). The average IDS score for patients in T group was 0.33 ± 0.49, which is much lower than those in the R group (4.11± 0.90, P ＜ 0.01). In addition, the average SpO2 value measured in T group during the intubation operation was significantly higher than that in R group (98.87±0.74% and 91.45 ±4.86% respectively, P ＜0.01) and there was less complication observed in patients of T group. Conclusions Using TruviewTM EVO2(R) optical laryngoscope for emergency endotracheal intubation could help to expose the glottis in an ideal view, predominately lower the C/L grade and thus decrease the difficulty in intubation for clinicians. Its specially designed oxygen supplier allows the SpO2 to be maintained at a high level during the operation as well as reduce the incidence of complication. It is therefore extremely useful for emergency tracheal intubation, particularly a difficulty intubation situation. Key words: TruviewTM EVO2(R) laryngoscope; Emergency tracheal intubation; C/L grade; Glottis exposure; Complication

Comparison of TruView EVO2 with Miller laryngoscope in paediatric patients

Except for neonates and specific malformations in children, management of the paediatric airway is not a major problem for the anaesthetist. Miller laryngoscope was traditionally used for paediatric intubation. The TruView EVO2 system is a recently introduced device with a unique blade that provides a wide and magnified laryngeal view. To assess the value of the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope with that of Miller laryngoscope in paediatric patients. Prospective analysis. Fifty 2-8-year paediatric patients presenting for surgery requiring tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using a Miller (Group M, n = 25) and TruView EVO2 laryngoscope (Group T, n = 25). Preoperative airway evaluation was performed by using the Mallampati scores. The Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS), the duration of the tracheal intubation procedure, the rate of successful placement of the endotracheal tube in the trachea, the view of the glottis according to the Cormack and Lehane grading criteria, number of intubation attempts, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) before and after intubation, lowest peripheric oxygen saturation during intubation attempts and all complications (minor laseration, dental or other airway trauma) were all recorded. Preoperative Mallampati scores and the IDS scores were similar between the Miller and TruView EVO2 laryngoscope. The average time for laryngoscopy was 6.36 ± 0.99 s in group M and 13.8 ± 7.99 s in group T (P < 0.001). The TruView EVO2 laryngoscope improved the Cormack and Lehane glottic view compared with the Miller laryngoscope. The HR change (difference before and after) in group M was significantly lower than that in group T (P < 0.001). However, the MAP change was similar between groups. The lowest peripheric oxygen saturation during intubation attempts was different between groups, 99.4 ± 0.57% in group M and 97.6 ± 2.41% in group T (P < 0.001). The results suggest that when compared with the Miller laryngoscope, the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope appears to improve the view of the larynx but requires a longer time for tracheal intubation. The IDS scores were similar; thus, the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope can be a good alternative to traditionally used Miller laryngoscope.

A randomised study comparing truview Evo2 laryngoscope with and without the use of camera

A randomised study comparing truview Evo2 laryngoscope with and without the use of camera

Using the Cusum Curve to Evaluate the Training of Orotracheal Intubation with the Truview EVO2® Laryngoscope

Learning curves have proved to be useful tools to monitor the performance of a worker on a new assignment. Those curves have been used to evaluate several medical procedures. The objective of this study was to evaluate the learning of orotracheal intubation (OTI) with the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope with the CUSUM learning curve.Four trainees underwent OTI training with the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope in a mannequin. They received orientation on the successful and failure criteria of OTI and alternated during the attempts, for a total of 300 OTI for each one. Four learning curves were plotted using the CUSUM cumulative addition method.It was calculated that the 105 OTIs were necessary to achieve proficiency. The four trainees crossed the line of acceptable failure rate of 5% before completing 105 OTIs; the first trainee reached proficiency after 42 OTIs, the second and third after 56 OTIs, and the fourth after 97 OTIs, and from then on their performance remained constant. Differences in the success rate between residents and experienced anesthesiologists were not observed.The CUSUM learning curve is a useful instrument to demonstrate objectively the ability when performing a new task. Laryngoscopy with the Truview EVO2 in a mannequin proved to be an easy procedure for physicians with prior experience in OTI; however, one should be cautious when transposing those results to clinical practice.

A comparison of Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller blade in neonates and infants

The Truview EVO2 laryngoscope is a recently introduced device with a unique blade that provides a wide and magnified laryngeal view at 46 degrees anterior refracted angle. An infant blade of the laryngoscope has recently become available. The aim of the study was to compare the Truview infant EVO2 laryngoscope with the Miller straight blade laryngoscope in order to determine whether the Truview EVO2 laryngoscope provided an improved laryngeal view at laryngoscopy and also to assess the time taken for intubation with the two devices. In this prospective randomized study, 60 neonates and infants of either sex undergoing surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled and divided into two groups: endotracheal intubation using a Truview infant blade (Group I) or with a Miller blade number 0 (Group II). The view of the glottis at laryngoscopy, time to intubation and the number of attempts required for intubation were recorded. The average time for laryngoscopy in Group I was 18.18 s and in Group II was 16.30 s, which though not significant clinically, is statistically significant (P = 0.002). While eight patients (26.6%) had Cormack and Lehane grade 2 view on laryngoscopy in Group II, only two patients (6.6%) had such a view in Group 1 (P = 0.039). The number of attempts at laryngoscopy was comparable in the two groups. In this study, we found that in neonates and infants, the tracheal intubation using Truview infant EVO2 blade took almost as much time as miller blade and provided improved laryngoscopic view as compared to the Miller blade.

New introducer for the true view EVO2 laryngoscope. A preliminary study

New introducer for the true view EVO2 laryngoscope. A preliminary study

An evaluation of the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope

The TruView EVO2 laryngoscope was compared with the traditional Macintosh laryngoscope in 200 patients who required tracheal intubation for elective surgery. Mallampati score determined prior to laryngoscopy was significantly related to the view of the glottis during laryngoscopy for both laryngoscopes. The view of the larynx was better with the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope than with the Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with a Cormack and Lehane grade greater than 1 (p < 0.01). The mean time to intubate was significantly shorter with the Macintosh laryngoscope (34 s) than with the TruView laryngoscope (51 s) (p < 0.01).