Video Laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-Lumen Endotracheal Tube Intubation: A Retrospective Analysis

ObjectiveThe authors hypothesized that video laryngoscopy (VL) facilitated double-lumen tube (DLT) insertion compared with direct laryngoscopy (DL).DesignA retrospective analysis.SettingAn academic hospital.ParticipantsPatients older than 18 years of age undergoing thoracic surgery requiring DLT placement between 2005 and 2011.InterventionsPatients without airway predictors of difficult intubation who were intubated under DL with Macintosh (DL-MAC, n = 40) or Miller (DL-MIL, n = 44) blades and VL with McGrath MAC (Aircraft Medical, Edinburgh, UK) and C-MAC (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) laryngoscopes (n = 46) were included in the study. Patients who were intubated with both VL devices were grouped into a VL group.MeasurementsPatients in all 3 groups had comparable preoperative demographics. Mallampati scores and ease of manual ventilation after the induction of anesthesia were also similar in all groups. The Cormack Lehane (C-L) grade views were significantly higher in patients in the DL-MAC than in the DL-MIL and VL groups (p < 0.006). The number of intubation attempts was similar in all 3 groups; however, the percentage of intubation reported to be difficult was higher in the DL-MAC than in the other 2 groups (p = 0.014). No damage to the airway was found in any of the groups.ConclusionDLT placement using VL appeared to overcome some of the limitations of DL-MAC but was similar to DL-MIL. The authors speculated that the ease of placement was related to the improved visualization of the vocal cords because there was a significantly greater number of C-L views 3 and 4 in the DL-MAC group as compared with the VL and DL-MIL groups. Hence, the authors advocate using VL, particularly when the laryngoscopist is inexperienced using DL-MIL for DLT placement.