A comparison of bonfils fiberscope-assisted laryngoscopy and standard direct laryngoscopy in simulated difficult pediatric intubation: a manikin study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Difficult airway management in children is challenging. One alternative device to the gold standard of direct laryngoscopy is the STORZ Bonfils fiberscope (Karl Storz Endoscopy, Tuttlingen, Germany), a rigid fiberoptic stylette-like scope with a curved tip. Although results in adults have been encouraging, reports regarding its use in children have been conflicting. We compared the effectiveness of a standard laryngoscope to the Bonfils fiberscope in a simulated difficult infant airway. METHODS: Ten pediatric anesthesiologists were recruited for this study and asked to perform three sets of tasks. For the first task, each participant intubated an unaltered manikin (SimBaby (TM), Laerdal, Puchheim, Germany) five times using a styletted 3.5 endotracheal tube (ETT) and a Miller 1 blade (group DL-Normal). For the second task, a difficult airway configuration simulating a Cormack-Lehane grade 3B view was created by fixing a Miller-1 blade into position in the manikin using a laboratory stand. Each participant then intubated the manikin five times with a styletted 3.5 ETT using conventional technique but without touching the laryngoscope (group DL-Difficult). In the third task, the manikin was kept in the same difficult airway configuration, and each participant intubated the manikin five times using a 3.5-mm ETT mounted on the Bonfils fiberscope as an adjunct to direct laryngoscopy with the Miller-1 blade (group BF-Difficult). Primary outcomes were time to intubate and success rate. RESULTS: A total of 150 intubations were performed. Correct ETT placement was achieved in 100% of attempts in group DL-Normal, 90% of attempts in group DL-Difficult and 98% of attempts in BF-Difficult. Time to intubate averaged 14 s (interquartile range 12-16) in group DL-Normal; 12 s (10-15) in group DL-Difficult; and 11 s (10-18) in group BF-Difficult. The percentage of glottic opening seen (POGO score) was 70% (70-80) in group DL-Normal; 0% (0-0) in group DL-Difficult; and 100% (100-100) in group BF-Difficult. DISCUSSION: The Bonfils fiberscope-assisted laryngoscopy was easier to use and provided a better view of the larynx than simple direct laryngoscopy in the simulated difficult pediatric airway, but intubation success rate and time to intubate were not improved. Further studies of the Bonfils fibrescope as a pediatric airway adjunct are needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".