A systematic review of meta-analyses comparing direct laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopy

In the preceding 20 years, many randomized-controlled trials and meta-analyses have compared direct Macintosh laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopy. The videolaryngoscope blades have included both traditional Macintosh blades and hyperangulated blades. Macintosh and hyperangulated blades differ in their geometry and technique for tracheal intubation; certain patient populations may benefit from one blade type over another. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess whether published meta-analyses comparing direct Macintosh laryngoscopy to videolaryngoscopy have accounted for the videolaryngoscope blade type. Secondary objectives evaluated heterogeneity among practitioner experience and specialty, clinical context, patient population, and original primary study outcomes.

A search was performed across Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, ClinicalKey, PubMed, TRIP, AccessAnesthesiology, Google Scholar, and ANZCA discovery. A systematic review identified meta-analyses which compared direct Macintosh laryngoscopy to videolaryngoscopy. There were no patient age or clinical specialty restrictions. Exclusion criteria included non-English language, studies comparing non-Macintosh blade to videolaryngoscopy, and studies in awake patients.

Twenty-one meta-analyses were identified that were published between 1 January 2000 and 7 May 2020. Macintosh and hyperangulated videolaryngoscope blades were combined in most studies (16/21; 76%). Heterogeneity was also present among practitioner experience (20/21; 95%), clinician specialty (15/21; 71%), and clinical locations (10/21; 48%). Adult and pediatric patients were combined or not defined in 5/21 studies (24%). The primary outcomes of the meta-analyses varied, with the most common (7/21; 33%) being first-pass tracheal intubation success.

Heterogeneity across important clinical variables is common in meta-analyses comparing direct Macintosh laryngoscopy to videolaryngoscopy. To better inform patient care, future videolaryngoscopy research should differentiate blade type, clinical context, and patient-related primary outcomes.