Background: The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of the Pentax-AWS for tracheal intubation during chest compression, compared with that of the Macintosh laryngoscope.
Methods: The systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were performed according the PRISMA statement. The relative risk (RR), mean difference (MD), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by the Review Manager 5.2 software for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively.
Results: Twelve trials included 424 tracheal intubations by Pentax-AWS and 421 tracheal intubations by Macintosh laryngoscope. In studies examining novice laryngoscopists, successful intubation (RR1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, P < 0.0007) and time for instrumentation (MD -7.7 sec, 95% CI -10.1 sec--5.4 sec, P < 0.00001) were improved using the Pentax-AWS. With respect to experts' hands there was no difference between the two devices in both of these outcomes.
Conclusions: Compared to the Macintosh laryngoscopy, Pentax-AWS offers advantages for novice laryngoscopists during chest compression, while these benefits are not seen with experts' hands.