Evidence Hub

Video vs Direct Laryngoscopy for Tracheal Intubation After Cardiac Arrest: A Secondary Analysis of the Direct vs Video Laryngoscope Trial

Muhs AL, Seitz KP, Qian ET, Imhoff B, Wang L, Prekker ME, Driver BE, Trent SA et al.

Chest, 2025

1,417 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Airway management is a critical component of the care of patients experiencing cardiac arrest, but data from randomized trials on the use of video vs direct laryngoscopy for intubation in the setting of cardiac arrest are limited. Current American Heart Association guidelines recommend placement of an endotracheal tube either during CPR or shortly after return of spontaneous circulation, but do not provide guidance around intubation methods, including the choice of laryngoscope.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does use of video laryngoscopy improve the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt, compared with use of direct laryngoscopy, among adults undergoing tracheal intubation after experiencing cardiac arrest?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This secondary analysis of the Direct vs Video Laryngoscope (DEVICE) trial compared video laryngoscopy vs direct laryngoscopy in the subgroup of patients who were intubated after cardiac arrest. The primary outcome was the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt. Additional outcomes included the duration of laryngoscopy.

RESULTS: Among the 1,417 patients in the DEVICE trial, 113 patients (7.9%) experienced cardiac arrest before intubation, of whom 48 patients were randomized to the video laryngoscopy group and 65 patients were randomized to the direct laryngoscopy group. Successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 40 of 48 patients (83.3%) in the video laryngoscopy group and in 42 of 65 patients…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,417 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free