A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope

Ozkan Onal; Irem Gumus; Aysun Ozdemirkan; Faruk Cicekci; Mehmet Sarı; Hasan Bayram; Cansu Ciftci; Emine Aslanlar; Jale Celik

doi:10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610

eISSN: 2299-0054
ISSN: 1895-4588

Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques

Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Supplements Editorial board Reviewers Subscription Contact Instructions for authors Ethical standards and procedures

Editorial System

Submit your Manuscript

Editorial Policies

Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications

4/2019
vol. 14

Send email

Copy url:

abstract:

Original paper

A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope

Ozkan Onal

¹

,

Irem Gumus

¹

,

Aysun Ozdemirkan

¹

,

Faruk Cicekci

¹

,

Mehmet Sarı

¹

,

Hasan Huseyin Bayram

¹

,

Cansu Ciftci

¹

,

Emine Aslanlar

¹

,

Jale Bengi Celik

¹

Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Medical Faculty, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey

Videosurgery Miniinv 2019; 14 (4): 486–494

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610

Online publish date: 2019/03/14

View full text Get citation

EndNote

Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero

AMA

Onal O, Gumus I, Ozdemirkan A, et al. A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques. 2019:486-494. doi:10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610.

APA

Onal, O., Gumus, I., Ozdemirkan, A., Cicekci, F., Sarı, M.,  & Bayram, H. H. et al. (2019). A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques, 486-494. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610

Chicago

Onal, Ozkan, Irem Gumus, Aysun Ozdemirkan, Faruk Cicekci, Mehmet Sarı, Hasan H Bayram,  and Cansu Ciftci et al. 2019. "A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope". Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques: 486-494. doi:10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610.

Harvard

Onal, O., Gumus, I., Ozdemirkan, A., Cicekci, F., Sarı, M., Bayram, H., Ciftci, C., Aslanlar, E.,  and Celik, J. (2019). A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques, pp.486-494. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610

MLA

Onal, Ozkan et al. "A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope." Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques, 2019, pp. 486-494. doi:10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610.

Vancouver

Onal O, Gumus I, Ozdemirkan A, Cicekci F, Sarı M, Bayram H et al. A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope. Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques. 2019:486-494. doi:10.5114/wiitm.2019.83610.

PlumX metrics:

Introduction
A difficult airway is one of the main causes of morbidity and mortality in patients who undergo surgical interventions. Therefore, many devices and algorithms have been developed for the management of a difficult airway. However no study has been conducted comparing Frova catheter (FC) and a Bonfils fiberoscope (BF) to date.

Aim
To compare the effectiveness and success of two devices, a FC and BF, in difficult intubation cases.

Material and methods
Design: Single-centre randomized controlled trial in patients with difficult airways. The assignment order was created by unplanned number charts, and the assignment was hidden in closed covers, which were not unlocked until case permission had been provided. Setting: The trial was undertaken in a university hospital in Turkey. The primary analysis was based on 60 participants (n = 30, n = 30) with difficult intubation. The main outcomes were the success rates of placement of the tracheal tube in the trachea and the duration of the tracheal intubation process.

Results
In the BF group, successful intubation was carried out in 25 of the 30 (83.3%) patients, whereas intubation was successful in 28 of the 30 patients (93.3%) in the FC group. Patients who could not be intubated with the first device were intubated with the other device. The mean duration of intubation was 109 (85–140) s in the BF group, whereas it was 38.8 (26–60) s in the FC group.

Conclusions
Both devices were successful in difficult intubation cases. However, given the shorter duration of intubation using the FC and its lower cost as compared with that of the BF, the FC can be considered superior to the BF in difficult intubation cases.

keywords:

A comparative randomized trial of intubation success in difficult intubation cases: the use of a Frova intubation catheter versus a Bonfils intubation fiberoscope

Ozkan Onal 1 , Irem Gumus 1 , Aysun Ozdemirkan 1 , Faruk Cicekci 1 , Mehmet Sarı 1 , Hasan Huseyin Bayram 1 , Cansu Ciftci 1 , Emine Aslanlar 1 , Jale Bengi Celik 1

intubation, difficult airway, intratracheal, equipment and supplies, endoscopes, catheters, Frova, Bonfils

Ozkan Onal

¹

,

Irem Gumus

¹

,

Aysun Ozdemirkan

¹

,

Faruk Cicekci

¹

,

Mehmet Sarı

¹

,

Hasan Huseyin Bayram

¹

,

Cansu Ciftci

¹

,

Emine Aslanlar

¹

,

Jale Bengi Celik

¹