Indian Journal of Anaesthesia  
About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions
Home | Login  | Users Online: 1388  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size    


ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 61  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 338-343

Comparison of endotracheal intubation time in neutral position between C-Mac® and Airtraq® laryngoscopes: A prospective randomised study


Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College and Hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Syed Moied Ahmed
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh - 202 002, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ija.IJA_564_16

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: In the recent past, many novel devices such as AirTraq®and C-MAC®video laryngoscope (VL) have been introduced in an attempt to reduce anaesthetic morbidity and mortality associated with difficult intubation. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare C-MAC®VL with a standard Macintosh blade and the AirTraq®optical laryngoscope as a intubating devices with the patient's head in neutral position. Methods: Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status I–II patients were randomly assigned to be intubated with C-MAC®VL (Group CM; n = 30) or AirTraq® (Group AT; n = 30) in the neutral position, with or without the application of optimization manoeuvres. The primary outcomes of this study were the success rate and the time taken to intubate. Glottic view, ease of tracheal intubation and haemodynamic responses were considered as secondary end points. Results: The incidence of successful intubation was similar in both the groups (P = 1.00). However, the time for intubation was significantly less with C-MAC®VL (Group CM = 14.9 ± 12.89 s, Group AT = 26.3 ± 13.34 s; P = 0.0014). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of ease of intubation and glottic view. However, the haemodynamic perturbations were much less with C-MAC®VL. Conclusion: We conclude that both the devices were similar in visualising larynx in the neutral position with similar success rates of intubation. However, the C-MAC®VL was better with respect to intubation time and haemodynamic stability.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1612    
    Printed10    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded289    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal