Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 5, 2025

Guidelines for Elective Pediatric Fiberoptic Intubation
Published on: January 17, 2011
Videolaryngoscopes versus direct laryngoscopes in children: Ranking systematic review with network meta-analyses of
Clístenes C de Carvalho1, Stéphanie L P A Regueira2, Ana Beatriz S Souza3
1Department of Post-Graduation, Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira, Recife, Brazil.
Insights
Videolaryngoscopes significantly reduce failed tracheal intubation attempts and major complications in children. However, device performance varies, and evidence quality is low, necessitating further research.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Anesthesiology
- Medical Device Technology
- Clinical Trial Analysis
Background:
- Videolaryngoscopes enhance tracheal intubation in adults, but their pediatric efficacy remains unclear.
- This review compares video and direct laryngoscopes for pediatric orotracheal intubation safety and effectiveness.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and rank videolaryngoscopes against direct laryngoscopes for pediatric tracheal intubation.
- To assess efficacy (intubation success rates) and safety (complications, glottic view, intubation time).
Main Methods:
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials in patients aged 18 years or younger.
- Searched multiple databases, including PubMed, for relevant studies published up to January 27, 2021.
- Assessed evidence quality using GRADE recommendations.
Main Results:
- Videolaryngoscopy decreased failed first intubation attempts and failed intubation within two attempts in infants (<1 year).
- Reduced major complications in infants (<1 year) and overall pediatric population (0-18 years).
- No significant difference in intubation time; varying performance metrics among videolaryngoscopes; evidence quality is low to very low.
Conclusions:
- Videolaryngoscopes offer improved safety and efficacy for pediatric tracheal intubation compared to direct laryngoscopy.
- Further research is needed to identify optimal videolaryngoscope devices for specific pediatric clinical scenarios.
- Caution is advised when interpreting findings due to the low quality of existing evidence.
Background:
Videolaryngoscopes improve tracheal intubation in adult patients, but we currently do not know whether they are similarly beneficial for children. We designed this ranking systematic review to compare individual video and direct laryngoscopes for efficacy and safety of orotracheal intubation in children.
Methods:
We searched PubMed and five other databases on January 27, 2021. We included randomized clinical trials with patients aged ≤18 years, comparing different laryngoscopes for the outcomes: failed first intubation attempt; failed intubation within two attempts; failed intubation; glottic view; time for intubation; complications. In addition, we assessed the quality of evidence according to GRADE recommendations.
Results:
We included 46 studies in the meta-analyses. Videolaryngoscopy reduced the risk of failed first intubation attempt (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.31-0.61; p = .001) and failed intubation within two attempts (RR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.33-0.33; p < .001) in children aged <1 year. Videolaryngoscopy also reduced the risk of major complications in both children aged <1 year (RR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.12-0.96; p = .046) and children aged 0-18 years (RR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.25-0.65; p = .002). We did not find significant difference between videolaryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for time to intubation in children aged <1 year (MD = -0.95 s; 95% CI: -5.45 to 3.57 s; p = .681), and children aged 0-18 years (MD = 1.65 s; 95% CI: -1.00 to 4.30 s; p = .222). Different videolaryngoscopes were associated with different performance metrics within this meta-analysis. The overall quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low.
Conclusion:
Videolaryngoscopes reduce the risk of failed first intubation attempts and major complications in children compared to direct laryngoscopes. However, not all videolaryngoscopes have the same performance metrics, and more data is needed to clarify which device may be better in different clinical scenarios. Additionally, care must be taken while interpreting our results and rankings due to the available evidence's low or very low quality.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation V: Advanced Airway Management Techniques
Esophageal Strictures-II: Clinical Features and Management
Healthcare providers should gather a comprehensive medical history and conduct a physical examination for diagnosis. If esophageal stricture is...
Endoscopic Studies I: Bronchoscopy and Thoracoscopy
Bronchoscopy
Description
Bronchoscopy is a procedure that involves direct visualization of the larynx, trachea, and bronchi for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. A flexible fiber optic or rigid bronchoscope is used to carry out the procedure. The fiber-optic bronchoscope is more frequently used due...
Esophageal Varices-II: Clinical Features and Management
In the initial assessment, a thorough review of the patient's medical history is vital to identify risk factors such as liver disease, alcohol...
Esophageal Strictures-I: Introduction
Etiology
The primary cause of esophageal strictures is long-standing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), accounting for about 70 to 80% of adult cases. Chronic acid reflux can lead to injury and scarring of the esophageal lining, culminating in...
Endoscopic Procedures III: Video Capsule Endoscopy

