Author's response to reviews Title: The Role of Rigid Indirect Videolaryngoscopy in the Successful Orotracheal Intubation of Adults: A Systematic Review of Randomized and Non-Randomized Trials. Authors:

Please find enclosed our revised manuscript, " An Evidence Based Review of Rigid Indirect Videolaryngoscopy in the Successful Orotracheal Intubation of Adults " by David W Healy et al., which we would like to submit for consideration for publication as a review article in BMC Anesthesiology. We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. I have detailed the level of contribution of each author in the manuscript. I confirm that the PRISMA guidelines were reviewed and help guide the development of the review, and reporting in the manuscript. It complies with the PRISMA guidelines. All permissions for the device photographs were sought and approved. I can confirm there are no competing interests, financial or otherwise. All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to BMC Anesthesiology. Many thanks, again, to each of the reviewers who took the time to review and provide their thoughtful comments to improve our study and manuscript. We enclose a point-by-point response to each: Title: The title is unclear. Perhaps " A Systematic Review of Orotracheal Intubation Success using Video laryngoscopy "-agreed, changed to " A Systematic Review of the role of Videolaryngoscopy in Successful Orotracheal Intubation " Introduction: Page 5: " However, even given this broad definition of difficult laryngoscopy, this still suggests an impressive overall [intubation] success rate of >95% for direct laryngoscopy among patients thought to be suitable for this technique. "-agreed, changed, thank you