Comparison of Macintosh laryngoscope and King Vision video laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in adult patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31636/pmjua.v9i1-2.3Keywords:
Endotracheal intubation, patients, Video endotracheal intubation, Difficult AirwaysAbstract
Background: Development of video laryngoscope has made management of airway easier. 0ur study was aimed to compare the efficacy of Macintosh laryngoscope and King Vision video laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in adult patients under general anesthesia.
Objectives: The primary objective of the study was to compare the glottic view obtained , the need for external manipulation, endotracheal tube insertion time and attempts taken for successful intubation with Macintosh laryngoscope and King Vision video laryngoscope. The secondary objective was to estimate the changes in hemodynamic parameters and to evaluate the occurrence of complications during intubation.
Materials and Methods: The study included 136 patients posted for surgery under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated in group C (N=68) and group V (N=68 ).Endotracheal intubation was done in group C by Macintosh and in group V by King Vision video laryngoscope. Laryngoscopy was assessed by Cormack Lehane grading and the need for any manipulation. The intubation time was calculated with each blade. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded and any complication during laryngoscopy and intubation were noted. The observations were analysed statistically by SPSS Program for windows version 28.
Results: In group C, 61.8% of patients had Cormack and Lehane score I while in group V 76.5 % of patients had score I . Mean time of successful intubation was 34.90±8.35 sec in group C while in group V it was 32.82± 5.20 second . There was no statistical difference in distribution of patients according to number of attempts of intubation. In group C, 64.7% of patients needed external laryngeal pressure while in group V 97.1 % patients were intubated without external laryngeal pressure. Both the groups were comparable in relation to changes in hemodynamic parameters and any complications associated with laryngoscopy and intubation.
Conclusion: We conclude that glottic view is better obtained with King Vision Video laryngoscope whereas optimisation of position and external laryngeal manipulation is often required with Macintosh laryngoscope to get similar glottic view. Introduction of King Vision video laryngoscope into the oral cavity takes time but intubation is easier with it. Hemodynamic variables and complications during the procedure are equally distributed between the two devices.
Downloads
References
1. Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, Cook TM, Schofield-Robinson OJ, Smith AF. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation: a Cochrane Systematic Review. British Journal of Anaesthesia [Internet]. 2017 Sep;119(3):369–83. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aex228.
2. Kaplan MB, Hagberg CA, Ward DS, Brambrink A, Chhibber AK, Heidegger T, et al. Comparison of direct and video-assisted views of the larynx during routine intubation. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia [Internet]. 2006 Aug;18(5):357–62. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2006.01.002.
3. Lee J, Cho Y, Kim W, Choi KS, Jang BH, Shin H, et al. Comparisons of Videolaryngoscopes for Intubation Undergoing General Anesthesia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Journal of Personalized Medicine [Internet]. 2022 Feb 26;12(3):363. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030363.
4. Su YC, Chen CC, Lee YK, Lee JY, Lin KJ. Comparison of video laryngoscopes with direct laryngoscopy for tracheal intubation. European Journal of Anaesthesiology [Internet]. 2011 Nov;28(11):788–95. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/eja.0b013e32834a34f3.
5. Abdallah R, Galway U, You J, Kurz A, Sessler DI, Doyle DJ. A Randomized Comparison Between the Pentax AWS Video Laryngoscope and the Macintosh Laryngoscope in Morbidly Obese Patients. Anesthesia and Analgesia [Internet]. 2011 Nov;113(5):1082–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0b013e31822cf47d.
6. Pazur I, Maldini B, Hostic V, Ozegic O, Obraz M. Comparison of Cormack Lehane grading system and Intubation difficulty score in patients intubated by D-blade Video and direct Macintosh laryngoscope : A randomised controlled study. Acta Clin Croat [Internet]. 2016;560–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2016.55.04.05.
7. Aziz MF, Dillman D, Fu R, Brambrink AM. Comparative Effectiveness of the C-MAC Video Laryngoscope versus Direct Laryngoscopy in the Setting of the Predicted Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology [Internet]. 2012 Mar 1;116(3):629–36. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/aln.0b013e318246ea34.
8. Elhadi SM, Rady WK, Elfadly AM. A comparative study between the Macintosh laryngoscope and the king vision video laryngoscope in endotracheal intubation. Research and Opinion in Anesthesia and Intensive Care [Internet]. 2016;3(4):168. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/2356-9115.195881.
9. Parasa M, Yallapragada S, Vemuri N, Shaik M. Comparison of GlideScope video laryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope in adult patients undergoing elective surgical procedures. Anesthesia: Essays and Researches [Internet]. 2016;10(2):245–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.167840.
10. Erdivanli B, Sen A, Batcik S, Koyuncu T, Kazdal H. Comparison of King Vision video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology [Internet]. 2018 Sep;68(5):499– 506. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. bjane.2018.04.008.
11. Bhattacharjee S, Maitra S, Baidya DK. A comparison between video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation in the emergency department: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia [Internet]. 2018 Jun;47:21–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.03.006.
12. Reena. Comparison of King Vision video laryngoscope (channeled blade) with Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation using armored endotracheal tubes. Journal of Anaesthesiology Clinical Pharmacology [Internet]. 2019;35(3):359–62. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/joacp.joacp_43_18.
13. Kaur G, Gupta S , Mehta N, Dhingra JS. Comparative evaluation of McGrath MAC, Truview Video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope for endotracheal intubation in patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia. Anesthesia: Essays and Researches [Internet]. 2020;14(1):20–24. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/aer.aer_16_20.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 A Ajiza, Keerty Garg, Kiran Sharma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
