Table 1 Description of randomized clinical trials that compared 3D printing prototypes with commercial equipment in mannequins
Author/year | N | Comarck-Lehane identification | Laryngeal visualization time | Intubation time | Intubation success rate | Intervention/control |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cohen T; Nishioka H./2017 [13] | 64 (anesthesiologists) | VLB:100% MAC: 21% (p = 0.000) | VLB:16.6seg MAC:39.1seg (p = 0.001) | VLB:55.4seg MAC:91.8seg (p = 0.042) | VLB:94.1% MAC:60% (p = 0.003) | VBL (3D) MAC blade (commercial) |
Lambert C; John S; John A./2020 [7] | 43 (professionals) | Pentax vs TVL vs Macintosh (p < 0.001) | No | TVL 17.5seg Pentax15.5seg Macintosh 27seg (p < 0.0001) | TVL 88% Pentax 97.7% Macintosh 67.4% | TVL (Tanser)(3D) Pentax AWS(3D) Macintosh (commercial) |
De Villiers C; Alphonsus C; Eave D; et al. 2021 [8] | 100 (experienced anesthesiologists and consultants) | No | No | VLP(3D):13.3 s MAC:18.2seg | No | VLP(3D) CMAC (commercial) |
Ataman A; Altina E 2021 [1] | 23 (emergency physicians and clinicians > 2 years of experience) | No | AirAngel 13.6seg Glidescope 8.1seg | AirAngel 27.7seg Glidescope 20.1 seg | AirAngel 56% Gladescope 87% | AirAngel (3D) Glidescope (commercial) |
Fonternel T; Rooyen H; Joubert G; Turton E | 36 anesthetics | C-MAC 80.6% class 1 Novel Device 50% (p = 0.0045) | C-MAC 5seg Novel Device 9.4seg (p < 0.001) (CI = 6.2–1.0) | C-MAC 13.8seg Novel Device 19seg (p = 0.001) | 100% | C-MACR VL with D-blade |