Abstract
When faced with a difficult intubation, one might abandon direct laryngoscopy in favor of another intubation technique. As technology promises to render the improbable routine, it is difficult to generate interest in a traditional airway technique such as direct laryngoscopy, especially when it proves to be difficult. However, direct laryngoscopy has also benefitted from technological advances. Illumination has improved with brighter sources such as light emitting diodes (LED) or fiberoptic light transmission replacing the direct light of incandescent bulbs. Battery longevity in modern laryngoscope handles is improved, including rechargeable options. Magnetic resonance imaging compatible (non-ferromagnetic) blades and disposable laryngoscope blades and handles have been designed. Despite these advances, interest in direct laryngoscopy, especially when it becomes difficult, pales in comparison to the excitement surrounding the use of a multitude of newer video-driven airway devices. Innovation and technological advancement in airway management are inevitable and desirable, but the simplicity and sheer efficacy of direct laryngoscopy remain constant. New airway techniques must always be evaluated against a “gold standard,” and for most airway devices, the gold standard is direct laryngoscopy. In the setting of difficult laryngoscopy, it is important to recognize that techniques and tools can facilitate difficult intubation and that a difficult airway need not be an absolute contraindication to the use of the technique.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Burkle CM, Walsh MT, Harrison BA, et al. Airway management after failure to intubate by direct laryngoscopy: outcomes in a large teaching hospital. Can J Anaesth. 2005;52:634–40.
Ovassapian A, Glassenberg R, Randel GI, et al. The unexpected difficult airway and lingual tonsil hyperplasia: a case series and a review of the literature. Anesthesiology. 2002;97:124–32.
Arino JJ, Velasco JM, Gasco C, Lopez-Timoneda F. Straight blades improve visualization of the larynx while curved blades increase ease of intubation: a comparison of the Macintosh, Miller, McCoy, Belscope and Lee-Fiberview blades. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50:501–6.
Maleck WH, Koetter KP, Lenz M, et al. A randomized comparison of three laryngoscopes with the Macintosh. Resuscitation. 1999;42:241–5.
Asai T, Matsumoto S, Fujise K, et al. Comparison of two Macintosh laryngoscope blades in 300 patients. Br J Anaesth. 2003;90:457–60.
Raw D, Skinner A. Miller laryngoscope blades (correspondence). Anaesthesia. 1999;54:500.
Bellhouse CP. An angulated laryngoscope for routine and difficult tracheal intubation. Anesthesiology. 1988;69:126–99.
Watanabe S, Suga A, Asakura N, et al. Determination of the distance between the laryngoscope blade and the upper incisors during direct laryngoscopy: comparison of a curved, and angulated straight, and two straight blades. Anesth Analg. 1994;79:638–41.
Hodges UM, O’Flaherty D, Adams AP. Tracheal intubation in a manikin: comparison of the Belscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope. Br J Anaesth. 1993;71:905–7.
McCoy EP, Mirakhur RK, Rafferty C, et al. A comparison of the forces exerted during laryngoscopy. The Macintosh versus the McCoy blade. Anaesthesia. 1996;5l:912–5.
Haridas RP. The McCoy levering laryngoscope blade. Anaesthesia. 1996;51:91.
Cook TM, Tuckey JP. A comparison between the Macintosh and the McCoy laryngoscope blades. Anaesthesia. 1996;51:977–80.
Iohom G, Franklin R, Casey W, et al. The McCoy straight blade does not improve laryngoscopy and intubation in normal infants. Can J Anaesth. 2004;51:155–9.
Bucx MJL, Snijders CJ, van der Vegt MH, et al. Reshaping the Macintosh blade using biomechanical modeling. Anaesthesia. 1997;52:662–7.
Gerlach K, Wenzel V, von Knobelsdorff G, et al. A new universal laryngoscope blade: a preliminary comparison with Macintosh laryngoscope blades. Resuscitation. 2003;57:63–7.
Lee J, Choi JH, Lee YK, et al. The Callander laryngoscope blade modification is associated with a decreased risk of dental contact. Can J Anaesth. 2004;51:181–4.
Mireskandari S-M, Asjaruzadeh N, Darabi M-E, et al. The Callendar modification of the Macintosh laryngoscope blade reduces the risk of tooth-blade contact in children. Pediatr Anaesth. 2008;18:1035–9.
Kimberger O, Fischer L, Plank C, et al. Lower flange modification improves performance of the Macintosh, but not the Miller laryngoscope blade. Can J Anaesth. 2006;53:595–601.
Galinski M, Adner F, Tran D, et al. Disposable laryngoscope blades do not interfere with ease of intubation in scheduled general anaesthesia patients. Eur J Anaesth. 2003;20:731–5.
Itoman EM, Kajioka EH, Loren G, et al. Dental fracture risk of metal vs plastic laryngoscope blades in dental models. Am J Emerg Med. 2005;23:186–9.
Jefferson P, Perkins V, Edwards VA, et al. Problems with disposal laryngoscope blade (correspondence). Anaesthesia. 2003;58:385–6.
Armour J, Mermion F, Birenbaum A, et al. Comparison of plastic single-use and metal reusable laryngoscope blades for orotracheal intubation during rapid sequence induction of anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:60–4.
Twigg SJ, McCormick B, Cook TM. Randomized evaluation of the performance of single-use laryngoscopes in simulated easy and difficult intubation. Br J Anaesth. 2003;90:8–13.
Jabre P, Leroux B, Brohon S, et al. A comparison of plastic single-use with metallic reusable laryngoscope blades for out-of-hospital tracheal intubation. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;50:258–63.
Levitan RM, Kelly JJ, Kinkle WC, et al. Light intensity of curved laryngoscope blades in Philadelphia emergency departments. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;50:253–7.
Howes BJ. The reliability of laryngoscope lights. Anaesthesia. 2006;61:488–91.
Malan CA, Wilkes AR, Hall JE, et al. An evaluation of the filtration performance of paediatric breathing system filters at low flows. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:644.
Scholz A, Faqrnum N, Wilkes AR, et al. Minimum and optimum light output of Macintosh size 3 laryngoscopy blades: a manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:163–8.
Malan CA, Scholz A, Wilkes AR, et al. Minimum and optimum light requirements for laryngoscopy in paediatric anaesthesia: a manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2008;63:65–70.
Tousignant G, Tessler MJ. Light intensity and area of illumination provided by various laryngoscope blades. Can J Anaesth. 1994;41:865–9.
Crosby E, Cleland M. An assessment of the luminance and light field characteristics of used direct laryngoscopes. Can J Anaesth. 1999;46:792–6.
Arthurs GJ. Fibre-optically lit laryngoscope. Anaesthesia. 1999;54:873–4.
Noguchi T, Koga K, Shkiga Y, et al. The gum elastic bougie eases tracheal intubation while applying cricoid pressure compared to a stylet. Can J Anaesth. 2003;50:712–7.
McNelis U, Syndercombe A, Harper J, et al. The effect of cricoid pressure on intubation facilitated by the gum elastic bougie. Anaesthesia. 2007;62:456–9.
Henderson JJ. Development of the ‘gum-elastic bougie’. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:103–4.
Jabre P, Combes X, Leroux B, et al. Use of gum elastic bougie for prehospital difficult intubation. Am J Emerg Med. 2005;23:552–5.
Kidd JF, Dyson A, Latto P. Successful difficult intubation. Anaesthesia. 1988;43:437–8.
Bair AE, Laurin EG, Schmitt BJ. An assessment of a tracheal tube introducer as an endotracheal tube placement confirmation device. Am J Emerg Med. 2005;23:754–8.
Shah KH, Kwong BM, Hazan A, et al. Success of the gum elastic bougie as a rescue airway in the emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2011;40(1):1–6.
Green DW. Gum elastic bougie and simulated difficult intubation. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:391–2.
Kadry T, Harvey M, Wallace M, et al. Frova intubating catheter position can be determined with aspirating oesophageal detection device. Emerg Med Australas. 2007;19:203–6.
Weisenberg M, Warters D, Medalion B. Endotracheal intubation with a gum-elastic bougie in unanticipated difficult direct laryngoscopy: comparison of a blind technique versus indirect laryngoscopy with a laryngeal mirror. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:1091–3.
Mingo O, Suaris P, Charman S, et al. The effect of temperature on bougies: a photographic and manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2008;63:1135–8.
Latto IP, Stacey M, Mecklenburgh J, et al. Survey of the use of the gum elastic bougie in clinical practice. Anaesthesia. 2002;57:379–84.
Combes X, LeRoux B, Dumerat M, et al. Unanticipated difficult airway in anesthetized patients: prospective validation of a management algorithm. Anesthesiology. 2004;100:1146–50.
Semjen F, Bordes M, Cros A-M. Intubation of infant with Pierre Robin syndrome: the use of the paraglossal approach combined with a gum-elastic bougie in six consecutive cases. Anaesthesia. 2008;63:147–50.
Annamaneni R, Hodzovic I, Wilkes AR, Latto IP. A comparison of simulated difficult intubation with multiple-use and single-use bougies in a manikin. Anaesthesia. 2003;53:45–9.
Marfin AG, Pandit JJ, Hames KC, et al. Use of the bougie in simulated difficult intubation. II. Comparison of single-use bougie with multiple-use bougie. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:852–5.
Latto P. Fracture of the outer varnish layer of a gum elastic bougie. Anaesthesia. 1999;54:497–8.
Kumar DS, Jones G. Is your bougie helping or hindering you? Anaesthesia. 2001;56:1121.
Kim DK, Kim H-K, Lee KM, et al. Poor performance of the pediatric airway exchange catheter in adults with cervical spine immobilization. Can J Anaesth. 2008;55:748–53.
Hodzovic I, Wilkes AR, Latto IP. Bougie-assisted difficult airway management in a manikin—the effect of position held on placement and force exerted by the tip. Anaesthesia. 2004;59:38–43.
Barak M, Philipchuck P, Abecassis P, Katz Y. A comparison of the Truview blade with the Macintosh blade in adult patients. Anesthesia. 2007;62:827–31.
Shiga T, Wajima Z, Inoue T, Sakamoto A. Predicting difficult intubation in apparently normal patients: a meta-analysis of bedside screening test performance. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:429–37.
Adnet F, Baillard C, Boron SW, et al. Randomized study comparing the “sniffing position” with simple head extension for laryngoscopic view in elective surgery patients. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:836–41.
Levitan RM, Mechem CC, Ochroch EA, Shofer FS, Hollander JE. Head-elevated laryngoscopy position: improving laryngeal exposure during laryngoscopy by increasing head elevation. Ann Emerg Med. 2003;41:322–30.
Schmitt HJ, Mang H. Head and neck elevation beyond the sniffing position improves laryngeal view in cases of difficulty direct laryngoscopy. J Clin Anesth. 2002;4:335–8.
Collins JS, Lemmens HJ, Brodsky JB, et al. Laryngoscopy and morbid obesity: a comparison of the “sniff” and “ramped” positions. Obes Surg. 2004;14:1171–5.
Rao SL, Kunselman AR, Schuler HG, DesHarnais S. Laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation in the head-elevated position in obese patients: a randomized, controlled, equivalence trial. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:1912–8.
Sellick BA. Cricoid pressure to control regurgitation of stomach contents during induction of anaesthesia. Lancet. 1961;2:404–6.
Knill RL. Difficult laryngoscopy made easy with a BURP. Can J Anaesth. 1993;40:279–82.
Takahata O, Kubota M, Mamiya K, et al. The efficacy of the “BURP” maneuver during a difficult laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg. 1997;84:419–21.
Levitan RM, Kinkle WC, Levin WJ, Everett WW. Laryngeal view during laryngoscopy: a randomized trial comparing cricoid pressure, backward-upward-rightward pressure, and bimanual laryngoscopy. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;47:548–55.
Donaldson 3rd WF, Heil BV, Donaldson VP, et al. The effect of airway maneuvers on the unstable C1-C2 segment. A cadaver study. Spine. 1997;22:1215–8.
Donaldson 3rd WF, Towers JD, Doctor A, et al. A methodology to evaluate motion of the unstable spine during intubation techniques. Spine. 1993;18:2020–3.
Gerling MC, Davis DP, Hamilton RS, et al. Effects of cervical spine immobilization technique and laryngoscope blade selection on an unstable cervical spine in a cadaver model of intubation. Ann Emerg Med. 2000;36:293–300.
Majernick TG, Bieniek R, Houston JB, Hughes HG. Cervical spine movement during orotracheal intubation. Ann Emerg Med. 1986;15:417–20.
Legrand S, Hindman BJ, Franklin D, et al. Craniocervical motion during direct laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation with the Macintosh and Miller blades. Anesthesiology. 2007;107:884–91.
Bivins HG, Ford S, Bezmalinovic Z, Price HM, Williams JL. The effect of axial traction during orotracheal intubation of the trauma victim with an unstable cervical spine. Ann Emerg Med. 1988;17:25–9.
Santoni BGPD, Hindman BJMD, Puttlitz CMPD, Weeks JBMPT, Johnson NBS, Maktabi MAMD, et al. Manual in-line stabilization increases pressures applied by the laryngoscope blade during direct laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:24–31.
Heath KJ. The effect on laryngoscopy of different cervical spine immobilisation techniques. Anaesthesia. 1994;49:843–5.
Agro F, Barzoi G, Montecchia F. Tracheal intubation using a Macintosh laryngoscope or a GlideScoope® in 15 patients with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth. 2003;90:705.
Henderson JJ. The use of paraglossal straight blade laryngoscopy in difficult tracheal intubation. Anaesthesia. 1997;52:552–60.
Yamamoto K, Tsubokawa T, Ohmura S, Itoh H, Kobayashi T. Left-molar approach improves the laryngeal view in patients with difficult laryncoscopy. Anesthesiology. 2000;92:70–4.
Cuvas O, Basar H, Gursoy N, Culhaoglu S, Demir A. Left-molar approach for direct laryngoscopy: is it easy? J Anesth. 2009;23:36–40.
Warner ME, Benenfeld SM, Warner MA, et al. Perianesthetic dental injuries: frequency, outcomes, and risk factors. Anesthesiology. 1999;90:1302–5.
Miñambres E, Burón J, Ballesteros MA, et al. Tracheal rupture after endotracheal intubation: a literature systematic review. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009;35:1056–62.
Rubin AD, Hawkshaw MJ, Moyer CA, et al. Arytenoid cartilage dislocation: a 20 year-experience. J Voice. 2005;19:687–701.
Hawkins DB, Seltzer DC, Barnett TE, et al. Endotracheal tube perforation of the hypopharynx. West J Med. 1974;120:282–6.
Arndt GA, Cambray AJ, Tomasson J. Intubation bougie dissection of tracheal mucosa and intratracheal airway obstruction. Anesth Analg. 2008;7:603–4.
Hosking E, Morris EA, Johnson CJ. Assessing the difficult airway. Anaesthesia. 2003;58:811.
Hodzovic I, Latto IP, Henderson JJ. Bougie trauma—what trauma? Anaesthesia. 2003;58:192–3.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nunnally, M.E., Hernandez, M.R. (2013). Unanticipated Difficult Direct Laryngoscopy: Methods to Improve Its Success. In: Glick, D., Cooper, R., Ovassapian, A. (eds) The Difficult Airway. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-92849-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-92849-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-92848-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-92849-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)