Contribution of the small intestine to systemic inflammation after cardiac arrest (CA) is poorly understood. The objective was to evaluate whether an in vivo rat model of 6 min CA is suitable to initiate intestinal ischaemia-reperfusion-injury and to evaluate histomorphological changes and inflammatory processes in the small intestinal mucosa resp. in sera. Adult male Wistar rats were subjected to CA followed by cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. Proximal jejunum and serum was collected at 6 h, 24 h, 72 h and 7 d post return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and from a control group. The small intestine was evaluated histomorphologically. Cytokine concentrations were measured in jejunum lysates and sera. Histomorphological evaluation revealed a significant increase in mucosal damage in the jejunum at all timepoints compared to controls (p < 0.0001). In jejunal tissues, concentrations of IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-10, and TNF-α showed significant peaks at 24 h and were 1.5- to 5.7-fold higher than concentrations at 6 h and in the controls (p < 0.05). In serum, a significant higher amount of cytokine was detected only for IL-1β at 24 h post-ROSC compared to controls (15.78 vs. 9.76 pg/ml). CA resulted in mild small intestinal tissue damage but not in systemic inflammation. A rat model of 6 min CA is not capable to comprehensively mimic a post cardiac arrest syndrome (PCAS). Whether there is a vital influence of the intestine on the PCAS still remains unclear.

Background: Endotracheal intubation continues to be the gold standard for securing the airway in emergency situations. Difficult intubation is still a dreadful situation when securing the airway. Objective: To compare VieScope with Glidescope and conventional Macintosh laryngoscopy (MAC) in a simulated difficult airway situation. Methods: In this randomized controlled simulation trial, 35 anesthesiologists performed endotracheal intubation using VieScope, GlideScope and MAC in a randomized order on a certified airway manikin with difficult airway. Results: For the primary endpoint of correct tube position, no statistical difference was found (p = 0.137). Time until intubation for GlideScope (27.5 ± 20.3 s) and MAC (20.8 ± 8.1 s) were shorter compared to the VieScope (36.3 ± 10.1 s). Time to first ventilation, GlideScope (39.3 ± 21.6 s) and MAC (31.9 ± 9.5 s) were also shorter compared to the VieScope (46.5 ± 12.4 s). There was no difference shown between handling time for VieScope (20.7 ± 7.0 s) and time until intubation with GlideScope or MAC. Participants stated a better Cormack & Lehane Score with VieScope, compared to direct laryngoscopy. Conclusion: Rate of correct tracheal tube position was comparable between the three devices. Time to intubation and ventilation were shorter with MAC and Glidescope compared to VieScope. It did however show a comparable handling time to video laryngoscopy and MAC. It also did show a better visualization of the airway in the Cormack & Lehane Score compared to MAC. Trial registration: The study was registered at the German Clinical Trials Register www.drks.de (Identifier: DRKS00024968) on March 31st 2021.