A comparison of the TruView EVO2 and macintosh laryngoscope blades

Intubation is one of the basic procedures of anesthesia. The reported frequency of difficult intubations is between 1.5% and 13%, which is a problem that requires a prompt solution. Although the likelihood of a difficult intubation can be estimated from preoperative measurements and scoring systems, obtaining direct access to the glottis during preoperative direct laryngoscopy can be difficult. The Mallampati test, which has a reported sensitivity of 50% and specificity of 100%, is a frequently used tool for the bedside prediction of the preoperative risk of a difficult intubation. This figure clearly allow room for surprises during a laryngoscopy and explain why guidelines have been issued for difficult intubations. Better laryngoscopes have been developed to overcome anatomical obstacles. For example, in contrast to a direct laryngoscopy, the development of new, indirect laryngoscopes has enabled intubation with an optic apparatus, which does not require the use of the oral, pharyngeal and tracheal axes. In addition, other laryngoscopy devices, such as the GlideScope, Pentax, and TruView, have aimed to improve laryngeal exposure through the use of optical apparatuses, lenses, and cameras that target anatomical obstacles. The TruView EVO2 (Truphatek International Ltd., Netanya, Israel) has previously been reported to provide a better laryngeal appearance through the use of its optical system, which provides a 42-degree deflection view through a 15-mm eyepiece. In addition, the TruView EVO2 reduces the problems associated with lens blurring by using a continuous O2 flow system (4-5 L/min) attached to the laryngoscope. In the present study, we compared the quality of the laryngoscopic exposures produced by the TruView EVO2 with that of Macintosh blades, which have traditionally been used for laryngoscopy.