Abstract

Background: The failure of direct laryngoscopy to provide an adequate glottic visualization, coupled with a major pressor response, has led to the development of newer intubation devices. Present study was planned to find out the efficacy and safety of conventional laryngoscope compared with video laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in adult patients. Material and Methods: Present study was Hospital based prospective randomized single blinded study, conducted in patients of age 18 to 60 years, either gender, ASA grade 1 & 2, weight 50-70 kg, Mallampatti grade 1 & 2, underwent general anaesthesia, Patients were allocated as group DL (intubated with conventional Laryngoscope) & group VL (intubated with Video Laryngoscope. Results: Number of attempts required for intubation for Group DL single in 80% as against 100% for Group VL. This difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Optimization maneuver used for intubation for Group DL single in 100% as against 10% for Group VL. This difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). We observed that mean SBP in Group DL was significantly higher as compared to Group VL after intubation 10 and 15 minutes as well as up to post operatively 30 minutes. Conclusion: Video laryngoscope is a superior device than the conventional direct laryngoscope (Macintosh). It can be used as a teaching tool for novice intubators and offers approach to tracheal intubation.

• 1.   Levitan R.M., Heitz J.W., Sweeney M., et al. The complexities of tracheal intubation with direct laryngoscopy and alternative intubation devices. Ann Emerg Med 2011; 57(3): 240–247.
• 2.   Lee L.C. Two curves theory does not clearly explain laryngoscopy and intubation. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106(6): 909–910.
• 3.   Dorsch J.A., Dorsch S.E. Understanding Anesthesia Equipment. 5th ed., 2012.
• 4.   Cooper R.M., Pacey J.A., Bishop M.J., McCluskey S.A. Early clinical experience with a new video laryngoscope (Glide Scope) in 728 patients. Can J Anaesth. 2005; 52: 191–8.
• 5.   Sun D.A., Warriner C.B., Parsons D.G., Klein R., Umedaly H.S., Moult M. The Glide Scope Video Laryngoscope: Randomized clinical trial in 200 patients. Br J Anaesth. 2005; 94: 381–4.
• 6.   Maharaj C.H., O’Croinin D., Curley G., Harte B.H., Laffey J.G. A comparison of tracheal intubation using the Airtraq or the Macintosh laryngoscope in routine airway management: A randomized, controlled clinical trial. Anaesthesia. 2006; 61: 1093–9.
• 7.   Ray D.C., Billington C., Kearns P.K., Kirkbride R., Mackintosh K., Reeve C.S., et al. A comparison of McGrath and Macintosh laryngoscopes in novice users: A manikin study. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64: 1207–10.
• 8.   Shiga T., Wajima Z., Inoue T., Sakamoto A. Predicting difficult intubation in apparently normal patients: A meta-analysis of bedside screening test performance. Anesthesiology 2005; 103: 429-37. 9. Elhadi S.M., Rady W.K., Elfadly A.M. A comparative study between the macintosh laryngoscope and the king vision video laryngoscope in endotracheal intubation. Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care. 2016 Oct 1; 3(4): 168.
• 10.   Upasana Gupta, Vasudha Jadhav. A comparative study between Videolaryngoscopy (True View evo 2) vs Conventional laryngoscopy (Macintosh) in adult patients with predicted difficult airway. MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesiology. March 2020; 13(3): 196-201.
• 11.   M. Barak, A. Ziser, A. Greenberg, et al. Hemodynamic and catecholamine response to tracheal intubation: direct laryngoscopy compared with fiberoptic intubation J Clin Anesth, 15 (2003), pp. 132-136.
• 12.   Timanayakar R.T., Anand L.K., Palta S. A randomized controlled study to evaluate and compare TruView blade with Macintosh blade for laryngoscopy and intubation under general anesthesia Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2011; 27: 199-204.
• 13.   Li JB, Xiong YC, Wang XL, Fan XH, Li Y, Xu H, et al... An evaluation of the TruView EVO2 laryngoscope. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 940-3.
• 14.   Tutuncu A.C., Kaya G., Tunali Y., Altintas F., Dilmen O.K. A comparison of the TruView EVO2 and macintosh laryngoscope blades. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2011; 66: 709-11.
• 15.   Singh I., Khaund A., Gupta A. Evaluation of TruView EVO2 laryngoscope in anticipated difficult intubation - A comparison to Macintosh laryngoscope. Indian J Anaesth 2009; 53: 164-8.
• 16.   Malik M.A., Subramaniam R., Maharaj C.H., Harte B.H., Laffey J.G.: Br J Anaesth. 2009; 103: 761-8.
• 17.   Sonavane S.R., Gvalanil S.K., Bhokare P.P. Comparison between Conventional Macintosh Laryngoscope and King Vision Video Laryngoscope in Endotracheal Intubation for Elective Surgeries: A Prospective Randomized Study.
• 18.   Mogahed M.M., Elghamri M.R., Anwar A.G. Comparative study of intubation performance between macintosh, the channeled king vision and the C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope in controlled hypertensive patients. J Anesth Clin Res 2017; 8(11): 780.
• 19.   Chemsian R., Bhananker S., Ramaiah R. Videolaryngoscopy. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci.2014 Jan; 4(1): 35-41.

Data Sharing Statement

Funding