At a glance
ClinicalIndex Comparison RecordStandardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.
A Randomized Comparison Between the C-MAC and Airtraq Videolaryngoscopes for First-attempt Intubation Success in Awake Patients With Anticipated Difficult Airway.
In Brief
A clinical study evaluating C-MAC videolaryngoscope and Airtraq videolaryngoscope. for Intubation. Completed, enrolled 90 participants across 1 site.
Detailed Summary
Patients with anticipated difficult airway are recommended to be managed with an awake tracheal intubation. Initially fibreoptic bronchoscopy was considered the gold standard, but in the last decade videolaryngoscopes have been demonstrated to be an efficacy alternative technique. Recently, a systematic review and meta-analysis was published investigating the efficacy and safety of videolaryngoscopy compared with fibreoptic bronchoscopy for awake tracheal intubation. Eight prospective, randomized studies were included, with different videolaryngoscopes (C-MAC, GlideScope, Pentax AWS, McGraft, and Bullard). However, a direct comparison of two different videolaryngoscopes for awake tracheal intubation in patients with anticipated difficult airway has not been performed.
Study Details
Timeline
Interventions
Patients with anticipated difficult airway will be awake intubated with a C-MAC videolaryngoscopy
Patients with anticipated difficult airway will be awake intubated with a Airtraq videolaryngoscopy