| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
The primary purpose of Rapid Responses is to provide a venue for readers to comment on and discuss scientific content published in CJA Online.
Please note that Rapid Response comments must be made in one of Canada's official languages, English or French, to solicit response.
General comments or concerns should be sent to the communications{at}cas.ca.
Electronic Letters to:
|
|
Electronic letters published:
|
|
|||
|
Gary P Yurina, CRNA Seattle Veterans Hospital Seattle WA
Send letter to journal:
Gary.Yurina{at}va.gov Gary P Yurina
|
The study by Jones et. al.( Canadian Journal of Anesthesia 54:21-27 (2007) Effect of stylet angulation and endotracheal tube camber on time to intubation with the GlideScope), appears to have used a standard malleable stylet in their 4 variations of ETT angle and camber. I suspect the results would be different if they had used the GlideScope® rigid stylet (Verathon) and a Parker Flex-Tip endotracheal tube ( Parker Medical). The rigid stylet is recommended and designed specifically for use with the GlideScope® Video Laryngoscope. The rigid stylet conforms to the GlideScope® blade shape. The rigid stylet maintains the curvature of the ETT easier than a normal stylet which can be more easily bent as it is makes contact with oral structures. (Glidescope product information). The Parker Flex-Tip®, with its curved tip, is designed to flex and slide past anatomical structures that it encounters in the airway. This provides less “hang up” on the tracheal wall or anterior anterior commissure. Since switching to these two products at our institution, in a series of 200 Glidescope® intubations there has been no significant difficulties passing the ETT with the angle of the ETT matching the angle of the Glidescope ® blade. Sincerely, Gary Yurina CRNA Seattle Veterans Hospital. (I have no financial interest in Parker Medical or Verathon) |
|||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |