Comparison of Endotracheal Intubation Time in Neutral Position Between C-Mac and Airtraq Laryngoscopes: A Prospective Randomised Study

Overview

Journal Indian J Anaesth

Specialty Anesthesiology

Date 2017 May 19

PMID 28515523

Citations 8

Authors

Syed Moied Ahmed

Kashmiri Doley

Manazir Athar

Nadeem Raza

Obaid Ahmad Siddiqi

Shahna Ali

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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; = 30) or AirTraq (Group AT; = 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 ( = 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; = 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.

Citing Articles

A Comparative Study Between Video Laryngoscope and Video Stylet for Tracheal Intubation in Patients With Simulated Cervical Fracture Injury: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Study.

Sanu A, Ahmed S Cureus. 2024; 16(8):e66360.

PMID: 39246862 PMC: 11378328. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.66360.

Clinically Preferred Videolaryngoscopes in Airway Management: An Updated Systematic Review.

Nedunchezhian V, Nedunchezhian I, van Zundert A Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(17).

PMID: 37685417 PMC: 10487223. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11172383.

Endotracheal Intubation of Difficult Airways in Emergency Settings: A Guide for Innovators.

Maguire S, Schmitt P, Sternlicht E, Kofron C Med Devices (Auckl). 2023; 16:183-199.

PMID: 37483393 PMC: 10362894. DOI: 10.2147/MDER.S419715.

Comparisons of Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation Undergoing General Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Lee J, Cho Y, Kim W, Choi K, Jang B, Shin H J Pers Med. 2022; 12(3).

PMID: 35330362 PMC: 8954588. DOI: 10.3390/jpm12030363.

Video screen visualization patterns when using a video laryngoscope for tracheal intubation: A systematic review.

Dean P, Kerrey B J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2022; 3(1):e12630.

PMID: 35028640 PMC: 8738719. DOI: 10.1002/emp2.12630.

References

Durga P, Kaur J, Ahmed S, Kaniti G, Ramachandran G . Comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq(®) and Mc Coy laryngoscope in the presence of rigid cervical collar simulating cervical immobilisation for traumatic cervical spine injury. Indian J Anaesth. 2013; 56(6):529-34. PMC: 3546238. DOI: 10.4103/0019-5049.104568. View

Tayal V, Riggs R, Marx J, TOMASZEWSKI C, Schneider R . Rapid-sequence intubation at an emergency medicine residency: success rate and adverse events during a two-year period. Acad Emerg Med. 1999; 6(1):31-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb00091.x. View

Sakles J, Laurin E, Rantapaa A, Panacek E . Airway management in the emergency department: a one-year study of 610 tracheal intubations. Ann Emerg Med. 1998; 31(3):325-32. DOI: 10.1016/s0196-0644(98)70342-7. View

Jaber S, Amraoui J, Lefrant J, Arich C, Cohendy R, Landreau L . Clinical practice and risk factors for immediate complications of endotracheal intubation in the intensive care unit: a prospective, multiple-center study. Crit Care Med. 2006; 34(9):2355-61. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000233879.58720.87. View

Ahmed-Nusrath A, Gao-Smith F . Laryngoscopy: time to shed fresh light?. Anaesthesia. 2011; 66(10):868-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06881.x. View

McElwain J, Malik M, Harte B, Flynn N, Laffey J . Determination of the optimal stylet strategy for the C-MAC videolaryngoscope. Anaesthesia. 2010; 65(4):369-78. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2010.06245.x. View

Maharaj C, Higgins B, Harte B, Laffey J . Evaluation of intubation using the Airtraq or Macintosh laryngoscope by anaesthetists in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy--a manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2006; 61(5):469-77. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2006.04547.x. View

Peterson G, Domino K, Caplan R, Posner K, Lee L, Cheney F . Management of the difficult airway: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2005; 103(1):33-9. DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200507000-00009. View

KaKi A, Almarakbi W, Fawzi H, Boker A . Use of Airtraq, C-Mac, and Glidescope laryngoscope is better than Macintosh in novice medical students' hands: A manikin study. Saudi J Anaesth. 2011; 5(4):376-81. PMC: 3227306. DOI: 10.4103/1658-354X.87266. View

10.

Cortellazzi P, Caldiroli D, Byrne A, Sommariva A, Orena E, Tramacere I . Defining and developing expertise in tracheal intubation using a GlideScope(®) for anaesthetists with expertise in Macintosh direct laryngoscopy: an in-vivo longitudinal study. Anaesthesia. 2014; 70(3):290-5. DOI: 10.1111/anae.12878. View

11.

Yentis S . Predicting difficult intubation--worthwhile exercise or pointless ritual?. Anaesthesia. 2002; 57(2):105-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.0003-2409.2001.02515.x. View

12.

Griesdale D, Bosma T, Kurth T, Isac G, Chittock D . Complications of endotracheal intubation in the critically ill. Intensive Care Med. 2008; 34(10):1835-42. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-008-1205-6. View

13.

Hirabayashi Y, Fujita A, Seo N, Sugimoto H . A comparison of cervical spine movement during laryngoscopy using the Airtraq or Macintosh laryngoscopes. Anaesthesia. 2008; 63(6):635-40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05480.x. View

14.

Heuer J, Barwing T, Barwing J, Russo S, Bleckmann E, Quintel M . Incidence of difficult intubation in intensive care patients: analysis of contributing factors. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2012; 40(1):120-7. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X1204000113. View

15.

Baciarello M, Zasa M, Manferdini M, Tosi M, Berti M, Fanelli G . The learning curve for laryngoscopy: Airtraq versus Macintosh laryngoscopes. J Anesth. 2012; 26(4):516-24. DOI: 10.1007/s00540-012-1351-4. View

16.

Levitan R, Ochroch E, Kush S, Shofer F, Hollander J . Assessment of airway visualization: validation of the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scale. Acad Emerg Med. 1998; 5(9):919-23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02823.x. View

17.

McElwain J, Laffey J . Comparison of the C-MAC®, Airtraq®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilization. Br J Anaesth. 2011; 107(2):258-64. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aer099. View

18.

Healy D, Maties O, Hovord D, Kheterpal S . A systematic review of the role of videolaryngoscopy in successful orotracheal intubation. BMC Anesthesiol. 2012; 12:32. PMC: 3562270. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2253-12-32. View

19.

Hwang S . A good laryngeal view does not guarantee perfectly successful tracheal intubation. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2016; 69(2):111-2. PMC: 4823403. DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2016.69.2.111. View

20.

Arslan Z, Yildiz T, Baykara Z, Solak M, Toker K . Tracheal intubation in patients with rigid collar immobilisation of the cervical spine: a comparison of Airtraq and LMA CTrach devices. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64(12):1332-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2009.06053.x. View