Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 898 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 16  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 326-330

Comparative evaluation of C-MAC videolaryngoscope with macintosh direct laryngoscope in patients with normal airway predictors


Department of Anesthesia, VMMC and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sapna Bathla
No. 88, 2nd Floor, C Block, Lajpat Nagar-I, New Delhi - 110 024
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/aer.aer_78_22

Rights and Permissions

Background: Video laryngoscopes (VL) assist in securing the airway faster and more accurately in difficult airways. However, data regarding its usefulness in patients with normal airways are sparse. Aim: We designed this study to compare the ease and success of endotracheal intubation between C-MAC and Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in adult patients with no anticipated airway difficulty. Settings and Design: The design involves prospective randomized case − control study. Subjects and Methods: One hundred and twenty adult patients with predicted normal airway were randomized into two groups and were intubated using VL (C-MAC VL) and DL (Macintosh DL), respectively. The Cormack-Lehane (CL) grade, time taken for intubation, attempts taken (number), and need for laryngeal maneuvers or stylets were recorded and analyzed for statistical significance. Results: Thirty-eight patients in the DL group and 48 patients in the VL group had CL I view, 20 patients in the DL group and 16 patients in the VL group had CL II, and two patients in the DL group had CL III view. None of the patients in Group VL had CL III view. In seven out of 60 cases in the DL group, difficulty was experienced during insertion of the laryngoscope blade as compared to two cases out of 60 in the VL group. The mean time taken for intubation was lesser in Group DL (28.48 s) as compared to 39.3 s in Group VL. Nine patients in Group DL and 16 patients in Group VL required external laryngeal manipulation. Stylets were used, in seven patients in group DL and in 11 patients in group VL. Conclusions: In patients with a predicted normal airway, C-MAC provides a better glottic view compared to Macintosh DL. Time taken for intubation using the C-MAC video laryngoscope was more. However, success rates on the first attempt at endotracheal intubation and the number of intubation attempts with either laryngoscope were similar.


[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
    Viewed256    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded28    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal