Qazi Ehsan Ali1, Bikramjit Das2, Syed Hussain Amir2, Obaid Ahmed Siddiqui2, Shaista Jamil2. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, A.M.U., Aligarh.,U.P., India. Electronic address: qaziehsanali@gmail.com. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, A.M.U., Aligarh.,U.P., India.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of the Airtraq versus the McCoy laryngoscope as intubation devices with the neck stabilized by a rigid cervical collar. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING:Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College. PATIENTS: 60 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients, aged 18-70 years, scheduled for various surgical procedures requiring tracheal intubation for surgical anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly allocated to undergo intubation with the McCoy (n = 30) or Airtraq (n = 30) laryngoscope. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Differences in intubation times between the Airtraq and the McCoy laryngoscope, modified Cormack-Lehane score, percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, and airway trauma were compared. Overall intubation success rates were 100% with both devices and a similar number of intubation attempts were required. However, the mean (SD) time required for successful intubation was shorter with the Airtraq (28.73 ± 6.39 sec) than the McCoy laryngoscope (39.11 ± 14.01 sec; P < 0.0001). The frequencies of intubation complications were similar. Esophageal intubation occurred in 4 cases but only with the McCoy laryngoscope. CONCLUSION:Intubation time was shorter with the Airtraq than the McCoy laryngoscope, even though the overall success rates between the two devices were similar.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of the Airtraq versus the McCoy laryngoscope as intubation devices with the neck stabilized by a rigid cervical collar. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College. PATIENTS: 60 ASA physical status 1, 2, and 3 patients, aged 18-70 years, scheduled for various surgical procedures requiring tracheal intubation for surgical anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomly allocated to undergo intubation with the McCoy (n = 30) or Airtraq (n = 30) laryngoscope. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Differences in intubation times between the Airtraq and the McCoy laryngoscope, modified Cormack-Lehane score, percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, and airway trauma were compared. Overall intubation success rates were 100% with both devices and a similar number of intubation attempts were required. However, the mean (SD) time required for successful intubation was shorter with the Airtraq (28.73 ± 6.39 sec) than the McCoy laryngoscope (39.11 ± 14.01 sec; P < 0.0001). The frequencies of intubation complications were similar. Esophageal intubation occurred in 4 cases but only with the McCoy laryngoscope. CONCLUSION: Intubation time was shorter with the Airtraq than the McCoy laryngoscope, even though the overall success rates between the two devices were similar.