Evidence Hub

Difficult laryngoscopy: incidence and predictors in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery versus general surgery patients

Ezri T, Weisenberg M, Khazin V, Zabeeda D, Sasson L, Shachner A, Medalion B

Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2003

444 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cardiac surgery patients might have a higher incidence of difficult laryngoscopy than the general population because of older age, dental problems, and obesity. The authors estimated the incidence and predictors of difficult laryngoscopy in coronary artery bypass surgery patients.

DESIGN: Prospective, controlled study.

SETTING: University setting.

PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass or general surgery.

INTERVENTIONS: Two hundred consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft and 444 general surgery patients, all aged >40 years, were compared for the incidence and predictors of difficult laryngoscopy, defined as a grade III or IV view.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Predictors of difficult laryngoscopy were considered mouth opening <4 cm, limited cervical mobility, thyromental distance <6 cm, protruding or partially missing upper teeth, and Mallampati classes 3 and 4. More cases of difficult laryngoscopy were recorded in cardiac patients (10% v 5.2%, p <0.023). The cardiac patients were older, mostly men, and belonged to ASA III-IV risk classes. Mallampati classes 3 and 4 were more frequent in the control group. With univariate analysis, difficult laryngoscopy correlated with 7 variables: older age, ASA-IV risk class, protruding or partially missing upper teeth, limited mouth opening, limited neck movement, thyromental distance <6 cm, and diabetes mellitus. Multivariate analysis adjusted for propensity score identified older age…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, 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: 444 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