Perbedaan Respon Hemodinamik pada Pasien yang Dilakukan Tindakan Intubasi Endotrakeal dengan Laringoskop Konvensional Dibandingkan Video Laringoskop di Kamar Bedah RSUP H. Adam Malik Medan

Abstract

Background:Under general anesthesia, it is necessary to perform ventilation using endotracheal intubation. To facilitate the intubation process, laryngoscopes are used, with various shapes, sizes, and additional functions such as the use of cameras for video laryngoscopy. Laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation have their own risks, one of which is the risk of a cardiovascular response. Studies show that the cardiovascular response after laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation can have a negative and significant impact. Various studies have shown varying hemodynamic responses to video laryngoscopes compared to conventional laryngoscopes. Therefore, this study was conducted to examine the differences in hemodynamic responses in patients with conventional laryngoscopy compared to video laryngoscopy. Destination:To compare the differences in hemodynamic responses (TDS, TDD, HR, MAP, RPP) in patients undergoing endotracheal intubation with conventional laryngoscope versus video laryngoscope at H. Adam Malik Hospital. Method:This study is an analytical study with a pretest – po clinical trial design sttest controlled groupto compare differences in hemodynamic responses in patients undergoing endotracheal intubation with conventional laryngoscope versus video laryngoscope. The study sample was all patients who underwent elective surgery under general anesthesia and endotracheal intubation and then met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results:This study showed a significant difference in the conventional laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy groups in the results of measuring systolic blood pressure. Whereas, the measurement of diastolic blood pressure at T0, T1, and T2 afterdavc f laryngoscopy did not show a significant difference. HR measurements in the conventional laryngoscopy group and video laryngoscopy at T0, T1, and T2 showed significant differences. This significant difference was found at T1 with HR of subjects on conventional laryngoscopy significantly higher than on video laryngoscopy. The results of the mean arterial pressure measurement in the conventional laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy groups did not show a significant difference. Conclusion:The use of a conventional laryngoscope for laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation further enhances the hemodynamic response compared to video laryngoscope, both when the glottis is visualized and when the cuff is inflated.