Evidence Hub

Video Versus Direct Laryngoscope for Pediatric Intubation During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Simulation-based Trials

I. K. Lee, Kyeong-Hun Lee, In-Young Choi, Na Jin Kim, Kyunghoon Kim

Pediatric emergency care, 2026

2 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE

High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is crucial for improving survival in cardiac arrest. Effective airway management can enhance outcomes but remains challenging due to anatomical and physiological factors in children. However, whether endotracheal intubation is superior to bag-valve-mask ventilation during CPR remains uncertain. Video laryngoscopes have emerged as an alternative to direct laryngoscopes, offering enhanced visualization; however, their efficacy for pediatric CPR remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of video laryngoscopes and direct laryngoscopes during pediatric CPR in simulation-based studies.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library was conducted up to February 2025. Only randomized controlled trials conducted in simulation settings comparing video and direct laryngoscopes in pediatric CPR were included. The primary outcomes were the first attempt success rate and the overall success rate. The secondary outcomes included intubation time, Cormack and Lehane grade as an indicator of glottic visualization, and dental compression. The risk of bias for the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Two reviewers independently evaluated each domain, and disagreements were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

Thirteen simulation-based studies with 2080 intubation attempts in manikins were included. Direct laryngoscopes demonstrated a 35% lower…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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