|
Comparison of five methods in predicting difficult laryngoscopy: Neck circumference, neck circumference to thyromental distance ratio, the ratio of height to thyromental distance, upper lip bite test and Mallampati test
Azim Honarmand1, Mohammadreza Safavi1, Ahmad Yaraghi1, Mohammadali Attari1, Mehdi Khazaei1, Majid Zamani2
1 Anesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Emergency Medicine, Alzahra Hospital, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
| Date of Submission | 16-Feb-2014 |
| Date of Acceptance | 22-Jan-2015 |
| Date of Web Publication | 04-Jun-2015 |
Correspondence Address:
Mohammadreza Safavi
Anesthesiology and Critical Care Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.158033
Background: Preoperative airway assessment tests have been presented to help in anticipating a difficult airway. We conducted this study to compare five methods in prediction of difficult laryngoscopy: Neck circumference (NC), NC to thyromental distance ratio (NC/TMD), the ratio of height to thyromental distance (RHTMD), upper lip bite test (ULBT) and Mallampati test (MMT). These five methods are the most commonly used ones and have different powers for it. It was not clear which of these methods predicts difficult laryngoscopy better.
Materials and Methods: Six hundred consecutive patients participated in this study. NC, NC/TMD and RHTMD were measured, and ULBT and MMT were performed and recorded. The laryngoscopy view was graded according to Cormack and Lehane's scale (CLS) and difficult laryngoscopy was defined as CLS grades 3 and 4. Accuracy of tests in predicting difficult laryngoscopy was assessed using the area under a receiver-operating characteristic curve.
Results: The area under the curve in ULBT and RHTMD were significantly larger than that in TMD, NC and MMT. No statistically significant differences were noted between TMD, NC and MMT (all P > 0.05) (ULBT = RHTMD > NC/TMD > TMD = NC = MMT). RHTMD (>22.7 cm) exhibited the highest sensitivity (sensitivity = 64.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 53.9-74.7) and the most specific test was ULBT (specificity = 99.41%, 95% CI: 98.3-99.9).
Conclusion: RHTMD and ULBT as simple preoperative bedside tests have a higher level of accuracy compared to NC/TMD, TMD, NC, MMT in predicting a difficult airway. Keywords: Airway management, intubation, laryngoscopy
How to cite this article:
Honarmand A, Safavi M, Yaraghi A, Attari M, Khazaei M, Zamani M. Comparison of five methods in predicting difficult laryngoscopy: Neck circumference, neck circumference to thyromental distance ratio, the ratio of height to thyromental distance, upper lip bite test and Mallampati test. Adv Biomed Res 2015;4:122 |
How to cite this URL:
Honarmand A, Safavi M, Yaraghi A, Attari M, Khazaei M, Zamani M. Comparison of five methods in predicting difficult laryngoscopy: Neck circumference, neck circumference to thyromental distance ratio, the ratio of height to thyromental distance, upper lip bite test and Mallampati test. Adv Biomed Res [serial online] 2015 [cited 2023 Jun 2];4:122. Available from: https://www.advbiores.net/text.asp?2015/4/1/122/158033 |
| Introduction | |  |
Airway management is a major concern for the anesthesiologists. [1] Difficult tracheal intubation that can cause intubation delay or failure, significantly increases the morbidity and mortality of general anesthesia. [2] The incidence of difficult laryngoscopy and intubation in various settings has been reported in a wide range from 1% to 15% in patients undergoing general anesthesia. [3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8] A large number of studies have been conducted to develop reliable predictors for a difficult airway. Many studies have tried to develop some bedside tests that are easy to perform and don't take the time and need to special equipment, but all these tests have their limitations, and no single one is complete. [2] Therefore, comparison of these methods is inevitable to find the best one. We compared some tests that are among well-known tests or the tests that recently have taken attentions in studies.
There are hypotheses suggesting that intubation in obese patients with fatty shorter necks and patients with small thyromental distance (TMD) are more difficult. Neck circumference (NC), NC/TMD ratio and the ratio of height to thyromental distance (RHTMD) have been presented with regard to this concept and have been assessed in several studies. [9],[10],[11] The Mallampati classification or Mallampati test (MMT) is a simple test to predict difficult tracheal intubation from anatomy of the oropharynx. The upper lip bite test (ULBT) has recently been introduced as a predictor test for difficult laryngoscopy (Cormack-Lehane classification grade 3 and 4), [12] mask ventilation [13] and intubation. It has been claimed that ULBT enjoys a higher positive predictive value (PPV) and specificity in comparison to Mallampati classification. [14] All these parameters are relatively quick bedside tests, and there is no need to special equipment and skills.
It is not clear, which method is better than others for prediction of difficult laryngoscopy. Therefore, we conducted this study to compare the predictive value of NC, NC/TMD, RHTMD, ULBT and MT for difficult laryngoscopy.
| Materials and Methods | | |
This prospective observational study was conducted between November 2011 and September 2012 in Ayatollah Kashani Hospital of Isfahan University of Medical sciences. After receiving approval from ethical committee of Isfahan University of Medical sciences, 600 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II adult patients, who were scheduled to undergo elective operations under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation were recruited for this study. The patients were selected to the study as nonprobability sampling. All subjects provided informed consent in accordance with the ethical committee.
Patients younger than 18 years of age, with an upper airway or facial abnormality or pathology (maxillofacial fractures, tumors, etc.), requiring a rapid sequence induction or awake intubation, and pregnant and edentulous patients were excluded.
Demographic information (age, height, gender, weight, body mass index, sex), patients' characteristics and history of any medical condition were taken and recorded at first.
Neck circumference (cm) at the level of cricoid cartilage was measured. The TMD (distance from the thyroid notch to the mentum in cm) was measured with the neck extended. The height was measured in cm with the patient barefoot on a flat surface against a solid wall. Then, NC/TMD and RHTMD were calculated and recorded.
The oropharyngeal view was classified by modified Mallampati classification (the revised scoring system of Samsoon and Young). Patients in the sitting position were asked to open their mouth fully and to protrude the tongue without phonation. The cases were rated as Class I, where soft palate, fauces, uvula, and pillars were visible; Class II, where soft palate, fauces, and uvula were visible; Class III, where the soft palate and the base of uvula were visible; and Class IV where soft palate was not visible. [15]
The ULBT was classified (as described by Khan et al.) as Class I, where lower incisors can bite the upper lip above the vermilion line, Class II, where lower incisors can bite the upper lip below the vermilion line, and Class III, where lower incisors cannot bite the upper lip. [14]
Predictive test measurements were carried out and recorded on all patients by a same physician not otherwise involved in the study.
No premedication was allowed, and the anesthetic technique was the same for all patients. In the operating room, the patients were positioned with pillows under the head, and the neck extended. Heart rate, blood pressure, SpO 2 and end tidal carbon dioxide were continuously monitored. Anesthesia was induced with propofol 2 mg/kg and fentanyl 3 μg/kg. Atracurium 0.6 mg/kg was IV administered to neuromuscular relaxation after mask ventilation. The laryngoscopic view was evaluated and rated with the patient's head in the sniffing position without any external laryngeal manipulation. Laryngoscopy was done by a Macintosh number 4 laryngoscope blade. Endotracheal intubation and evaluation of difficulty of laryngoscopy was performed by the same experienced anesthesiologist.
The laryngoscopic view was graded according to Cormack and Lehane's scale: Grade 1 view where the vocal cords were completely visible; grade 2 where only the arytenoids were visible; grade 3 where only the epiglottis was visible; and grade 4 where the epiglottis was not visible. Cormack-Lehane classification grades 3 and 4 were considered as difficult laryngoscopic view. [16]
The main goal of the study was to find out which test has the most discriminating power to be clinically useful. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed using the software MedCalc 9.2.0.1 (MedCalc Software, Mariakerke, Belgium). The area under ROC curve (AUC) was compared to obtain the most discriminative test. 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated and P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
| Results | | |
Six hundred subjects with a mean age of 44 (±17) years (range 18-75 years) participated in this study. Demographic data and characteristics of all patients are shown in [Table 1]. Laryngoscopy and intubation were possible for all of the patients. | Table 1: Demographic data of all patients and distribution of laryngoscopic view
Click here to view |
Predictive values of 5 tests in predicting difficult laryngoscopy (The optimal cutoff point, positive likelihood ratio [PLR] negative likelihood ratio PPV negative predictive value [NPV] AUC) are presented in [Table 2] and pairwise comparison of ROC curves are shown in [Table 3]. | Table 2: Predictive values of five methods in predicting difficult laryngoscopy (Grade 3 or 4 according to the modified Cormack-Lehane classification)
Click here to view |
Area under the curve rates for ULBT (0.789) and RHTMD (0.764) were more than those obtained using other tests and this difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). This rate for ULBT was more than that obtained using RHTMD, but it was not significant. AUC in NC/TMD was significantly higher than that in TMD, NC and MMT and no differences were noted between TMD, NC and MMT (ULBT = RHTMD > NC/TMD > TMD = NC = MMT). [Figure 1] shows the ROC curves for ULBT and RHTMD. | Figure 1: Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of upper lip bite test and ratio of height to thyromental distance
Click here to view |
Ratio of height to thyromental distance (>22.7 cm) has the highest sensitivity (sensitivity = 64.77%, 95% CI: 53.9-74.7) and the most specific test was ULBT (specificity = 99.41%, 95% CI: 98.3-99.9). ULBT has the most PPV and RHTMD has the most NPV (respectively 93.5% and 93.2%).
| Discussion | | |
Prediction of a difficult airway to prevent unanticipated difficult tracheal intubation and consequent events and develop a plan to convert a difficult intubation into an easy one is an important concern for anesthesiologists.
In this study, the incidence of difficult laryngoscopy was 14.7% that is more than what has been reported by previous studies. [11],[17]
Area under the curve of the ROC for RHTMD and ULBT was more than what had been observed in other tests that revealed that RHTMD and ULBT are highly predictive.
Short TMD has been introduced as a simple, clinically used criterion that could predict a difficult airway. Various cutoff points have been reported for this distance in previous studies. Patil et al. [18] suggested 6.5 cm as the cutoff point in adult patients; TMD >6.0-6.5 cm could predict the difficult, but usually possible laryngoscopy and intubation if there are no other anatomical abnormalities and laryngoscopy may be impossible in TMD <6 cm. However, the presence of anatomical difficulties may increase this cutoff point to 6.0-6.5. Frerk suggested 7 cm as the cutoff point for difficult intubation where the posterior pharyngeal wall could not be visualized during inspection of the oropharynx. [17] Short neck, decreased head extension, short mandible, deep mandible and high anterior larynx are factors that contribute to difficult laryngoscopy and may all influence TMD. [18]
Some studies have questioned small TMD in isolation, as a reliable predictive test for difficult laryngoscopy. [19],[20] Benumof [21] in a study reported that both large and small TMDs have predicted difficult intubation.
Furthermore, studies have shown that the value of single screening tests for predicting difficult airway is limited [2] and combinations of these single tests or risk factors have been suggested to be more diagnostic than each test alone. Methods such as the El-Ganzouri score have combined risk factors, [22] as the multivariate risk index systems these scores, are more time-consuming and difficult to perform. Thus, combining two of the most valuable risk factors may increase the diagnostic value without increasing the burden of test significantly.
The RHTMD has been shown to be a more specific predictor for difficult intubation. [23] In this study, RHTMD exhibited 64.7% sensitivity, 82.4% specificity, 38.8% PPV, 93.2% NPV and 0.76 AUC. It has a higher sensitivity than other tests, thus provides minimum false-negative predictions. It means that RHTMD misses the least number of difficult laryngoscopies. The failure of a test to predict a difficult case (false-negative) could result in deleterious and life-threatening events. Therefore, decreasing false-negative prediction is crucially important. ULBT and RHTMD have equal AUC, but sensitivity of RHTMD (64.7%) is more than that of ULBT (48.7%), and it can be more useful as a bedside screening test.
Krobbuaban et al. [11] compared the predictive value of TMD, neck movement, RHTMD, MMT and interincisor gap (IIG) for predicting difficult laryngoscopy. The optimal cutoff point for the RHTMD, for predicting difficult laryngoscopy was 23.5 (sensitivity, 77%; specificity, 66%). RHTMD (sensitivity 77%, PPV 24%, NPV 95%, odds ratio 6.72 [95% CI: 3.29-13.72]) had a higher sensitivity, PPV, and fewer false-negatives compared to other tests.
Shah et al. [24] reported that ULBT and RHTMD exhibited the highest sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV that is 74.63%, 91.53%, 58.82%, 95.7%, and 71.64%, 92.01%, 59.26%, 95.24% respectively, compared to TMD, MMT, IIG and head and neck movement.
In our previous study, [25] we found that the RHTMD was a useful predictor compare to MMT and ULBT with a sensitivity, specificity, and PPV of 75.6%, 58.5%, and 96.2%, respectively.
Krobbuaban et al. [11] reported RHTMD ≥23.5 and Schmitt et al. [23] suggested that RHTMD ≥25 can be used to predict difficult laryngoscopies, and we found RHTMD ≥22.7 as a determining test for predicting difficult laryngoscopy. These small differences could be due to ethnicity, but further investigation is needed to determine such an effect.
Recent studies have introduced ULBT as a useful test to predict difficult intubation. [14] Our results showed that the specificity (99.4%), PPV (93.5%), NPV (91.9%), PLR (83.3%) and AUC (0.78) of ULBT were higher than what obtained using other four tests. It is applicable, reliable and easy to perform and does not need any equipment or special knowledge. ULBT is influenced by movement of mandible, shape and position of teeth, and thus it can be used in anticipating difficulty in laryngoscopy.
Ali et al. [26] compared ULBT with MMT in predicting difficult intubation. ULBT showed significantly higher accuracy (91.9%), PPV (71.6% and 95% CI: 59.1-81.7) and NPV (97.3% and 95% CI: 94.2-98.8) compared to the MMT. Comparison of specificity (93%), however, did not reveal any significant difference between the two tests. The sensitivity was 87.5% (95% CI: 74.9-94.3).
Eberhart et al. [12] made the same comparison but reported different results. Discriminating power for both tests was low and for the ULBT (0.60 [95% CI: 0.57-0.63]) it was lower than Mallampati score (0.66 [0.63-0.69]).
| Conclusion | | |
The study indicated that RHTMD and ULBT as simple preoperative bedside tests have a higher level of accuracy compared to NC/TMD, TMD, NC, MMT in predicting a difficult airway. From among them, RHTMD can be more predictive as a screening test. Further studies are needed to compare single or combined tests to find the most accurate tests with the best clinical properties.
| Acknowledgments | | |
We thank Dr. Fereydun Haghdust for editorial review of the manuscript. The authors wish to sincerely thank the support of all the colleagues in Kashani Hospital Medical Center affiliated to Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in Isfahan, Iran. In addition, our special thanks go to the patients, who wholeheartedly and actively assisted us to carry out this research.
| References | | |
| 1. | Peterson GN, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Posner KL, Lee LA, Cheney FW. Management of the difficult airway: A closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 2005;103:33-9.  |
| 2. | Shiga T, Wajima Z, Inoue T, Sakamoto A. Predicting difficult intubation in apparently normal patients: A meta-analysis of bedside screening test performance. Anesthesiology 2005;103:429-37. |
| 3. | Combes X, Jabre P, Jbeili C, Leroux B, Bastuji-Garin S, Margenet A, et al. Prehospital standardization of medical airway management: Incidence and risk factors of difficult airway. Acad Emerg Med 2006;13:828-34. |
| 4. | De Jong A, Molinari N, Terzi N, Mongardon N, Arnal JM, Guitton C, et al. Early identification of patients at risk for difficult intubation in the intensive care unit: Development and validation of the MACOCHA score in a multicenter cohort study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013;187:832-9. |
| 5. | Fox WT, Harris S, Kennedy NJ. Prevalence of difficult intubation in a bariatric population, using the beach chair position. Anaesthesia 2008;63:1339-42. |
| 6. | Hung O, Mills J. Predictions and clinical decisions: A fine balance. Can J Anaesth 2000;47:721-4. |
| 7. | Siddiqi R, Kazi WA. Predicting difficult intubation - A comparison between Mallampati classification and Wilson risk-sum. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005;15:253-6. |
| 8. | Tuzuner-Oncul AM, Kucukyavuz Z. Prevalence and prediction of difficult intubation in maxillofacial surgery patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;66:1652-8. |
| 9. | Gonzalez H, Minville V, Delanoue K, Mazerolles M, Concina D, Fourcade O. The importance of increased neck circumference to intubation difficulties in obese patients. Anesth Analg 2008;106:1132-6. |
| 10. | Kim WH, Ahn HJ, Lee CJ, Shin BS, Ko JS, Choi SJ, et al. Neck circumference to thyromental distance ratio: A new predictor of difficult intubation in obese patients. Br J Anaesth 2011;106:743-8. |
| 11. | Krobbuaban B, Diregpoke S, Kumkeaw S, Tanomsat M. The predictive value of the height ratio and thyromental distance: Four predictive tests for difficult laryngoscopy. Anesth Analg 2005;101:1542-5. |
| 12. | Eberhart LH, Arndt C, Cierpka T, Schwanekamp J, Wulf H, Putzke C. The reliability and validity of the upper lip bite test compared with the Mallampati classification to predict difficult laryngoscopy: An external prospective evaluation. Anesth Analg 2005;101:284-9. |
| 13. | Khan ZH, Mofrad MK, Arbabi S, Javid MJ, Makarem J. Upper lip bite test as a predictor of difficult mask ventilation: A prospective study. Middle East J Anaesthesiol 2009;20:377-82. |
| 14. | Khan ZH, Kashfi A, Ebrahimkhani E. A comparison of the upper lip bite test (a simple new technique) with modified Mallampati classification in predicting difficulty in endotracheal intubation: A prospective blinded study. Anesth Analg 2003;96:595-9. |
| 15. | Samsoon GL, Young JR. Difficult tracheal intubation: A retrospective study. Anaesthesia 1987;42:487-90. |
| 16. | Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia 1984;39:1105-11. |
| 17. | Crosby ET, Cooper RM, Douglas MJ, Doyle DJ, Hung OR, Labrecque P, et al. The unanticipated difficult airway with recommendations for management. Can J Anaesth 1998;45:757-76. |
| 18. | Patil VU, Stehling LC, Zauder HI. Predicting the difficulty of intubation utilizing an intubation gauge. Anesthesiol Rev 1983;10:32-3. |
| 19. | Levitan RM, Everett WW, Ochroch EA. Limitations of difficult airway prediction in patients intubated in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 2004;44:307-13. |
| 20. | Chou HC, Wu TL. Thyromental distance and anterior larynx: Misconception and misnomer? Anesth Analg 2003;96:1526-7. |
| 21. | Benumof JL. Both a large and small thyromental distance can predict difficult intubation. Anesth Analg 2003;97:1543. |
| 22. | Cortellazzi P, Minati L, Falcone C, Lamperti M, Caldiroli D. Predictive value of the El-Ganzouri multivariate risk index for difficult tracheal intubation: A comparison of Glidescope videolaryngoscopy and conventional Macintosh laryngoscopy. Br J Anaesth 2007;99:906-11. |
| 23. | Schmitt HJ, Kirmse M, Radespiel-Troger M. Ratio of patient's height to thyromental distance improves prediction of difficult laryngoscopy. Anaesth Intensive Care 2002;30:763-5. |
| 24. | Shah PJ, Dubey KP, Yadav JP. Predictive value of upper lip bite test and ratio of height to thyromental distance compared to other multivariate airway assessment tests for difficult laryngoscopy in apparently normal patients. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2013;29:191-5. [ PUBMED]  |
| 25. | Safavi M, Honarmand A, Zare N. A comparison of the ratio of patient's height to thyromental distance with the modified Mallampati and the upper lip bite test in predicting difficult laryngoscopy. Saudi J Anaesth 2011;5:258-63. [ PUBMED] |
| 26. | Ali MA, Qamar-ul-Hoda M, Samad K. Comparison of upper lip bite test with Mallampati test in the prediction of difficult intubation at a tertiary care hospital of Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc 2012;62:1012-5. |
[Figure 1]
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]
| This article has been cited by | | 1 |
Diagnostic Efficacy and Clinical Value of Ultrasonography in Difficult Airway Assessment: Based on a Prospective Cohort Study |
|
| Huihui Wu, Hong Wang, Yuvaraja Teekaraman | | Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging. 2022; 2022: 1 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 2 |
Comparative Evaluation of Difficult Intubation Predictors in Children Under Two Years of Ages |
|
| Sedige Shahhosseini, Mohammad Montasery, Mohammadali Saadati, Amir Shafa | | Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine. 2021; In Press(In Press) | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 3 |
Clinical Relevance of Mallampati Grading in Predicting Difficult Intubation in the Era of Various New Clinical Predictors |
|
| Mamta Harjai,Sharif Alam,Priyesh Bhaskar | | Cureus. 2021; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 4 |
2022 American Society of Anesthesiologists Practice Guidelines for Management of the Difficult Airway |
|
| Jeffrey L. Apfelbaum, Carin A. Hagberg, Richard T. Connis, Basem B. Abdelmalak, Madhulika Agarkar, Richard P. Dutton, John E. Fiadjoe, Robert Greif, P. Allan Klock, David Mercier, Sheila N. Myatra, Ellen P. O’Sullivan, William H. Rosenblatt, Massimiliano Sorbello, Avery Tung | | Anesthesiology. 2021; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 5 |
Bedside tests for predicting difficult airways: an abridged Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy systematic review |
|
| D. Roth,N. L. Pace,A. Lee,K. Hovhannisyan,A. M. Warenits,J. Arrich,H. Herkner | | Anaesthesia. 2019; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 6 |
Anterior neck soft tissue thickness for airway evaluation measured by MRI in patients with cervical spondylosis: prospective cohort study |
|
| Yongzheng Han,Jingchao Fang,Hua Zhang,Mao Xu,Xiangyang Guo | | BMJ Open. 2019; 9(5): e029987 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 7 |
Airway physical examination tests for detection of difficult airway management in apparently normal adult patients |
|
| Dominik Roth,Nathan L Pace,Anna Lee,Karen Hovhannisyan,Alexandra-Maria Warenits,Jasmin Arrich,Harald Herkner | | Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 8 |
A Novel Difficult-Airway Prediction Tool for Emergency Airway Management: Validation of the HEAVEN Criteria in a Large Air Medical Cohort |
|
| Edward Kuzmack,Travis Inglis,David Olvera,Allen Wolfe,Kona Seng,Daniel Davis | | The Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2018; | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 9 |
Use of ultrasound to predict difficult intubation in Chinese population by assessing the ratio of the pre-epiglottis space distance and the distance between epiglottis and vocal folds |
|
| Sze Man Mandy Chan,Wai Yip Wong,Shing Kit Tommy Lam,Oi Fung Wong,Wing Sze Stephanie Law,Wing Yung Yolanda Shiu,Pui Yee Emma Mak | | Hong Kong Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2018; 25(3): 152 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | | | 10 |
A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF THE USEFULLNESS OF UPPER LIP BITE TEST IN COMBINATION WITH STERNO - MENTAL DISTANCE, THYRO - MENTAL DISTANCE AND INTER - INCISOR DISTANCE AS PREDICTOR OF EASE OF LARYNGOSCOPY |
|
| Chandita Konwar,Nabarup Dutta Baruah,Priyam Saikia,Anulekha Chakrabartty | | Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2015; 4(97): 16286 | | [Pubmed] | [DOI] | |
|
 |
|
|
|
Search Pubmed for