Comparison of airtraq™ versus C-MAC® videolaryngoscope for tracheal intubation in children with normal airways

Abstract

Background and Aims: When compared with direct laryngoscopes, videolaryngoscopes can provide a significantly better view of the larynx. There are no studies in children directly comparing Airtraq™ and C-MAC® videolaryngoscopes. We aimed to compare intubating characteristics between these two devices in pediatric patients. The primary outcome measure was the time needed for successful intubation and secondary outcome measures were the number of attempts to intubate, ease of intubation, percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, optimization maneuvers and complications such as airway trauma and esophageal intubation. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twelve children aged 1–12 years undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia are quiring tracheal intubation were enrolled. Children were randomized into two groups using computer generated randomization sequence. The t-test was used for analyzing quantitative data, nonparametric data were analyzed using Mann–Whitney test, and categorical data were analyzed using the Chi-square test. Results: Time to tracheal intubation was significantly longer with Airtraq™ (41.0 s) compared to C-MAC® (23.4 s); P 90% in both groups without maneuvers. Conclusion: The study found that in pediatric patients with normal airways, time to intubation was faster with C-MAC® as compared to AirtraqTM. C-MAC® also performed better in aspects like the number of attempts and ease of intubation.

Keywords

• airtraqtm
• anesthesia
• c-mac®
• pediatric
• videolaryngoscopy