Comparing videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope use for nasotracheal intubation in patients with manual in-line stabilization

  • Liu-Jia-Zi Shao
  • Shao-Hua Liu
  • Fu-Shan XueEmail author


Competing interests

None declared.

Editorial responsibility

This submission was handled by Dr. Hilary P. Grocott, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia.


  1. 1.
    Roh GU, Kwak HJ, Lee KC, Lee SY, Kim JY. Randomized comparison of McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope, Pentax Airway Scope, and Macintosh direct laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation in patients with manual in-line stabilization. Can J Anesth 2019; DOI:
  2. 2.
    Tong JL, Tung A. A randomized trial comparing the effect of fiberoptic selection and guidance versus random selection, blind insertion, and direct laryngoscopy, on the incidence and severity of epistaxis after nasotracheal intubation. Anesth Analg 2018; 127: 485-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lim HS, Kim D, Lee J, Son JS, Lee JR, Ko S. Reliability of assessment of nasal flow rate for nostril selection during nasotracheal intubation. J Clin Anesth 2012; 24: 270-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Adnet F, Borron SW, Racine SX, et al. The intubation difficulty scale (IDS): proposal and evaluation of a new score characterizing the complexity of endotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 1997; 87: 1290-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McElwain J, Simpkin A, Newell J, Laffey JG. Determination of the utility of the Intubation Difficulty Scale for use with indirect laryngoscopes. Anaesthesia 2011; 66: 1127-33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnesthesiologyBeijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations