title: A comparison of conventional tube and EndoFlex tube for tracheal intubation in patients with a cervical spine immobilisation.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The EndoFlex is a new type of tracheal tube with an adjustable distal tip that can be bent without the use of a stylet. The aim of this study was to compare a standard endotracheal tube with the EndoFlex tracheal tube for intubation in patients with simulated cervical spine injury.
  
  
  METHODS
  A group of 60 patients without any kind of the cervical spine injury, classified as the ASA physiological scale I or II and qualified for elective surgery procedures were intubated with the use of classical Macintosh laryngoscope, and either a standard endotracheal tube with the intubation stylet in it or EndoFlex tube without stylet. The subjects were randomized into two subgroups. All patients have had the cervical collar placed on their neck for the simulation of intubation procedure in case of the spinal injury.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The intubation procedure was performed by 16 anesthetists with different experience (5-19 yrs). Time of intubation with the use of EndoFlex tube was similar to that with a the use of standard endotracheal tube and intubation stylet: Me (median) 19.5 s [IQR (interquatile range) 18-50] vs. Me 20 s [IQR 17-60] respectively (p = 0.9705). No significant additional maneuvers were necessary during intubation with the use of EndoFlex tube in comparison with standard endotracheal tube (70% vs. 56.6%) (p = 0.4220). Subjective assessment of the usability of both tubes revealed that more anesthesiologists found intubations with the use of EndoFlex more demanding than intubation with conventional tracheal tube and intubation stylet. The assessment of usability: very easy 3.3% vs. 20%, easy 83.4% vs. 56.7%, difficult 10% vs. 20% and very difficult 3.3% vs. 3.3% for standard endotracheal tube with stylet and EndoFlex, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In conclusion we asses, that the EndoFlex tube does not improve intubation success rate, in fact it requires more maneuvers facilitating intubation and was found to be more difficult to use.
authors.affiliation: Department of Emergency Medicine and Disaster Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland. tomasz.gaszynski@umed.lodz.pl.
authors.forename: Ewelina
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Gaszynska
authors.forename: Michal
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Stankiewicz-Rudnicki
authors.forename: Andrzej
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Wieczorek
authors.forename: Tomasz
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Gaszynski
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D007103:Immobilization; D007442:Intubation, Intratracheal / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D020704:Laryngoscopes; D008875:Middle Aged; D011044:Poland; D013119:Spinal Cord Injuries; D055815:Young Adult