Preloaded bougie with endotracheal tube over airway

Preloaded vs. Standard Bougie: Which Intubation Technique is Right for You?

"A new study explores the effectiveness of preloaded bougie techniques in emergency intubation, offering insights for medical professionals."


In emergency medicine, securing a patient's airway is a critical, often life-saving, intervention. Endotracheal intubation, the process of inserting a tube into the trachea to assist breathing, is a cornerstone of emergency care. However, difficult airways can present significant challenges, requiring practitioners to be adept at various intubation techniques and the use of airway adjuncts.

One such adjunct is the bougie, a flexible introducer that aids in guiding the endotracheal tube (ETT) into the trachea, particularly when visualization of the vocal cords is obstructed. Traditionally, the bougie is inserted first, followed by the ETT being threaded over it. However, a modified approach, known as the preloaded bougie (PB) technique, involves loading the ETT onto the bougie before insertion. This article will help you understand more about this approach.

A recent study has compared the preloaded bougie technique against the standard bougie technique in a cadaveric model, evaluating success rates, time to intubation, and provider preference. Understanding the nuances of these techniques can empower emergency airway operators to choose the method with which they are most comfortable and proficient.

AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

Bougie as an Adjunct

An endotracheal tube introducer, or bougie, cannulates the trachea before endotracheal tube delivery using the Seldinger technique. In most emergency departments, the bougie has historically been used as an adjunct or rescue device for difficult airways rather than as part of a primary intubation strategy. The source attributes this practice partly to clinicians' inexperience with the device. A 2025 guide argues for considering a bougie-first strategy, particularly when appropriate patient selection and procedural preparation are available.

From Catheter to Modern Introducer

The history of the gum-elastic bougie extends across almost half a century of development and controversy. In 1949, Macintosh described using a gum-elastic urinary catheter as an introducer to facilitate difficult tracheal intubation. In 1973, Dr. P. Hex Venn, an anaesthetic adviser to Eschmann Brothers & Walsh Ltd, designed a later tube-introducer development. Modern tube introducers have since evolved for the era of video laryngoscopy and are considered for more than backup rescue use.

Preloaded Bougie vs. Standard Bougie: Understanding the Techniques

Preloaded bougie with endotracheal tube over airway

Before diving into the study's findings, it's essential to clarify the two techniques being compared. The standard bougie technique involves first visualizing the glottis with a laryngoscope and then inserting the bougie into the trachea. An assistant then threads the ETT over the bougie, which is subsequently advanced into the trachea. The preloaded bougie (PB) technique, on the other hand, involves pre-positioning the ETT over the bougie before even beginning laryngoscopy. The operator then guides the bougie, with the ETT already in place, through the vocal cords and into the trachea.

The rationale behind the PB technique is to streamline the intubation process by eliminating a step. Instead of inserting the bougie first and then having an assistant thread the ETT over it, the ETT is already in place, ready to be advanced once the bougie is properly positioned. This could potentially save time and reduce the complexity of the procedure, especially in high-pressure emergency situations.

  • Standard Bougie Technique: The bougie is inserted first, followed by the ETT.
  • Preloaded Bougie (PB) Technique: The ETT is pre-positioned on the bougie before insertion.
AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

Recent First-Pass Evidence

In a randomized crossover manikin trial conducted during continuous chest compressions, first-attempt success was 98.5% with the bougie-first approach, 87.7% with a preloaded bougie, 86.2% with an endotracheal tube and stylet, and 70.8% with an endotracheal tube without a stylet. A separate pediatric-airway study found that, in an easy airway, naked endotracheal tubes and stylets had higher first-pass success than railroaded or preloaded bougies. In that study, the mean success rates were 96.3% for the naked tube and 98.2% for the stylet. These findings indicate that performance varies with the airway model and technique being tested.

Limits of Preloading

A cadaveric comparison reported that bougies can be particularly effective with a Cormack-Lehane Grade III view, in which only the epiglottis is seen, and when obesity, limited cervical mobility, or upper-airway distortion is present. The same source reports that success rates for difficult orotracheal intubation with bougies have ranged from 74% to 99%. These figures describe a broad range rather than a single expected success rate. The evidence therefore supports usefulness in difficult airways while leaving room for substantial variation by setting and technique.

Bougie Versus Stylet

The Bougie Use In Emergency Airway Management (BEAM) trial was a randomized, single-center clinical trial conducted in 2018 at one of the sites included in the BOUGIE trial. It reported a 98% first-pass success rate with a bougie compared with 87% with a stylet. The cited source notes that the center had a baseline default intubation method, which is relevant when interpreting the comparison. A separate study protocol is evaluating routine bougie use during prehospital emergency intubation in adults without predictors of difficult airway, reflecting continued uncertainty about its role in standard cases.

The study, conducted using a human cadaveric airway model, sought to determine if there was a significant difference in success rates or time to intubation between the two techniques. Researchers also assessed participants' subjective ratings of ease of intubation and their overall preference for one technique over the other. Understanding the methodology used is vital for interpreting the results and considering their implications for real-world clinical practice.

The Bottom Line: Choosing the Right Technique for You

Ultimately, the choice between the standard bougie and preloaded bougie techniques may come down to personal preference and comfort level. Both techniques have proven effective in securing airways during emergency intubation. Emergency airway operators should feel confident in using the technique with which they are most comfortable, and proficient in both methods.

AI Search Multiple angles on this topic

Use First, Not Only as Rescue

A meta-analysis found that using a bougie as an aid during the first intubation attempt was associated with increased success. However, the certainty of the evidence was low. The authors concluded that a bougie should probably be used first rather than reserved only as a rescue device in emergency intubations. This recommendation should therefore be understood alongside the stated limitation in evidence certainty.

Practice Patterns and Training

The bougie is used to cannulate the trachea before endotracheal tube delivery through the Seldinger technique. Despite that role, most emergency departments have not incorporated it into a primary intubation strategy and have historically treated it as an adjunct or rescue device for difficult airways. The source suggests that inexperience with bougie use may help explain this practice pattern. Expanding its role therefore involves not only choosing a device but also building familiarity with its preparation and use.

Similar results on success and speed

  • 95.7% for each technique success rateBoth techniques succeeded in 95.7% of attempts; the baseline is the other technique, which had the same success rate. There were two failures with each method.[1]

Where this cadaver comparison is weakest

  • The comparison used a cadaveric airway model, so its results describe performance in that setting rather than establishing outcomes in patient care.[2]
  • Most participants were inexperienced intubators, and the authors noted that this may have influenced results, including times with the preloaded method.[1]
  • The authors cautioned that the cohort’s limited diversity of training could have affected success results or shaped participants’ preferences.[1]
  • Each cadaver underwent many attempts during setup, training, evaluation, and placement checks, making the experimental exposure unlike a single isolated attempt.[1]

Who took part and how the cadaver airway study was run

PopulationEM residents, medical students, EM physician assistants, and staff emergency physicians[2]
Sample size47 participants[2]
SettingEmergency medicine intern airway course using a human cadaveric airway model[2]
ComparisonStandard bougie technique compared with preloaded bougie technique[2]
Main outcomeSuccess rates and time to successful intubation[2]
Times cited12[2]

How later work has situated the preloaded technique

That later paper also reported that its preloaded-technique timings were similar to timings in two prior small simulation studies, including an emergency-medicine journal study. The cited excerpt gives 29.7 seconds for standard and 29.4 seconds for preloaded in that comparison, but does not identify the study by name.[3]

What remains unresolved about preloading

  • Would the similar measured outcomes persist in patient intubations, rather than in a cadaver airway model?[2]
  • Would participants with more experience show the same timing and preference patterns, given the authors’ concern about the inexperienced majority and limited training diversity?[1]
  • Would alternate ways of preparing or using the techniques change the comparison? The authors noted that experience with alternate techniques could lead to improvements.[1]

Terms used in the study

Visual analogue scale
A rating scale used to record a participant’s perceived ease.[2]
Preloaded bougie
A technique in which the endotracheal tube is positioned over the bougie before insertion through the vocal cords.[1]

About this Article -

Written with AI assistance from published research, and reviewed by the Mystum team. See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.5811/westjem.2015.4.22857, Alternate LINK

Title: Comparison Of Preloaded Bougie Versus Standard Bougie Technique For Endotracheal Intubation In A Cadaveric Model

Subject: General Medicine

Journal: Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

Publisher: Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

Authors: Jay Baker, Kevin Maskell, Aaron Matlock, Ryan Walsh, Carl Skinner

Published: 2015-07-15

Everything You Need To Know

1

What does the standard bougie technique involve in endotracheal intubation?

The standard bougie technique involves first visualizing the glottis with a laryngoscope and then inserting the bougie into the trachea. An assistant then threads the ETT over the bougie, which is subsequently advanced into the trachea. This method has been used for a longer period of time compared to the preloaded version.

2

How does the preloaded bougie (PB) technique differ from the standard bougie technique?

The preloaded bougie (PB) technique involves pre-positioning the ETT over the bougie before even beginning laryngoscopy. The operator then guides the bougie, with the ETT already in place, through the vocal cords and into the trachea. This technique aims to streamline the intubation process, potentially saving time during emergency situations.

3

Why are both bougie techniques important in emergency airway management?

In emergency medicine, difficult airways can present significant challenges. Both bougie techniques help in guiding the endotracheal tube (ETT) into the trachea, particularly when visualization of the vocal cords is obstructed. The preloaded bougie technique's potential to save time can be crucial in critical situations.

4

How should emergency airway operators decide between using the standard bougie and preloaded bougie techniques?

The choice between the standard bougie and preloaded bougie techniques may come down to personal preference and comfort level. Emergency airway operators should feel confident in using the technique with which they are most comfortable, and proficient in both methods. Factors like the operator's experience and the specific clinical scenario can influence this choice.

5

What type of study was done to compare the effectiveness of these two bougie techniques?

A study used a human cadaveric airway model to determine if there was a significant difference in success rates or time to intubation between the two techniques. Researchers also assessed participants' subjective ratings of ease of intubation and their overall preference for one technique over the other. The study highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of each technique.

Newsletter Subscribe

Subscribe to get the latest articles and insights directly in your inbox.