BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations by video laryngoscopy to that by direct laryngoscopy.
METHODS: The systematic search, data extraction, critical appraisal, and pooled analysis were performed according the PRISMA statement. The odds ratio(OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by the Review Manager 5.2 software for dichotomous outcome.
RESULTS: Eleven trials included 1425 tracheal intubations by video laryngoscopy and 1632 tracheal intubations by Macintosh laryngoscopy. Video laryngoscopy reduced the risk of erroneous esophageal intubations (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04-0.24, P < 0.00001, I2 : 0%) compared with Macintosh laryngoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that video laryngoscopy would reduce the incidence of erroneous esophageal intubations.
