In this randomised crossover trial we measure the space between the right side of the laryngoscope blade and the right palatopharyngeal wall in a cohort of ASA I-III patients with a normal mouth opening. We compare the remaining spaces for seven different videolaryngoscopes and compare these to a classic Macintosh laryngoscope.
Intubation using indirect videolaryngoscopy has many advantages over classic direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope. There are many different videolaryngoscopes available, and the blade differs largely between videolaryngoscopes. Different size and angles of blades may have an impact on the space available for insertion of the endotracheal tube. The space between the blade and the palatopharyngeal wall may be reduced significantly, so that there is less room in the mouth to insert an endotracheal tube. Positioning and manoeuvring of the endotracheal tube may consequently be more difficult and may traumatize the pharynx as was described in a few case reports, especially when an endotracheal tube with a rigid stylet inserted was used.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
489
C-MAC ® videolaryngoscope
Coopdech® videolaryngoscope
McGrath® Series 5 videolaryngoscope
Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven
Eindhoven, North Brabant, Netherlands
Palatopharyngeal distance
Two laryngoscopes (one classic direct laryngoscope and one indirect videolaryngoscope) will subsequently be inserted into the patient's mouth at random order. With each laryngoscope the horizontal distance between the laryngoscope blade and mid-palatopharyngeal fold will be measured using an mm ruler.
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Difference in palatopharyngeal distance between videolaryngoscope and classic Macintosh laryngoscope
Investigating how this space differs from the space that remains on the right side of the blade of the classic Macintosh laryngoscope and the palatopharyngeal wall in the same cohort of patients.
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Difference in palatopharyngeal distance between videolaryngoscopes
Comparing the difference in remaining palatopharyngeal space between the different videolaryngoscopes.
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Cormack-Lehane score
Registering difficulty of intubation (Cormack-Lehane score)
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Successful intubation
Registering the number of successful intubations.
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Use of rigid stylet
Use of rigid stylet during intubation
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Glidescope® Cobalt videolaryngoscope
King Vision® videolaryngoscope
Venner® videolaryngoscope
McGrath® MAC (Aircraft Medical, Edinburgh, UK)
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Number of attempts
Number of intubation attempts
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Time until picking up endotracheal tube
Time until picking up endotracheal tube
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Epiglottic down-folding
Occurrence of epiglottic down-folding
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min
Complications
Any complication that occurs during intubation will be registered.
Time frame: Participants will be followed during induction of anesthesia, an expected average of 10 min