Diagnostic Performance of Airway Ultrasound for the Assessment of Difficult Laryngoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Authors' conclusion
With the currently available evidence, the 3 commonly used point-of-care ultrasound measures used to identify difficult laryngoscopy, (SED, HMDR, and pre-E/E-VC), showed better sensitivity and similar specificity to clinical measures.
Study context
- Population
- Adults >18 years under GA for elective procedures; obstetric populations and evident anatomic airway abnormalities excluded24 studies
- Comparison
- Airway ultrasound measures for predicting difficult laryngoscopy
- Outcome
- Diagnostic performance of airway ultrasound for predicting difficult laryngoscopy
Methodological detailsobservational studies, Cochrane collaboration guidelines, Searches of PubMed (Medline), Embase, Clinical Trials and Google Scholar; last 20 years; English or Spanish
- Observational studies
- Cochrane collaboration guidelines
- Searches of PubMed (Medline), Embase, Clinical Trials and Google Scholar; last 20 years; English or Spanish
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Prediction of difficult laryngoscopy
| Group | Sensitivity | Specificity | Diagnostic odds ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Skin-to-epiglottis distance (SED) | 75% | 86% | |
| HMDR | 61% | 88% | |
| pre-E/E-VC | 82% | 83% | 22.2 |
Sensitivity
Skin-to-epiglottis distance (SED)75%
HMDR61%
pre-E/E-VC82%
Specificity
Skin-to-epiglottis distance (SED)86%
HMDR88%
pre-E/E-VC83%
Diagnostic odds ratio
Skin-to-epiglottis distance (SED)— not stated in the abstract
HMDR— not stated in the abstract
pre-E/E-VC22.2
Further pooled results
Diagnostic performance and number of ultrasound parameters across studies
- Variable across studies
Original publication
Diagnostic Performance of Airway Ultrasound for the Assessment of Difficult Laryngoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. Published 2 March 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →