Comparison of EzVision® Videolaryngoscope and Gum Elastic Bougie-Assisted Machintosh Laryngoscopy
NCT ID: NCT06213389
Last Updated: 2024-11-22
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
70 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-05-01
2024-11-19
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Efficiency of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope
NCT02482870
King Vision vs Macintosh Laryngoscopy for Intubation Time in Novice Users
NCT07174050
Evaluation of Differences in Video Laryngeal Mask Airway and Fastrack Laryngeal Mask
NCT06121895
Videolaryngoscopic Intubation Using Macintosh vs.Hyperangulated Blades in Patients With Expected Difficult Intubation
NCT05522049
Comparison of Two Blades of Videolaryngoscope in Simulated Difficult Airway in Children
NCT03719638
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients to entubate with EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
Patients will intubate with EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
Patient will be intubated with EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
Patients to intubate with Macintosh blade
Patients will intubate with Macintosh blade
Macintosh Blade
Patient will be intubated with Macintosh Blade
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
Patient will be intubated with EzVision® videolaryngoscopy
Macintosh Blade
Patient will be intubated with Macintosh Blade
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. American Association of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical condition I-II-III;
3. Elective surgery requiring oral endotracheal intubation for general anesthesia;
4. Compliance with one of the difficult intubation estimation criteria (if more than one)
5. Expected extubation in the operating room
Exclusion Criteria
2. Age \<18 and \>65
3. ASA IV and above
4. Emergency cases
5. Body Mass Index (BMI) \> 40 kg/m2.
6. Pregnancy
7. Cardiac surgery
8. Unexpectedly difficult intubation
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Nevsehir Public Hospital
OTHER_GOV
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Mehmet Akif Yazar, MD
Principal Investigator
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Konya City Hospital
Konya, , Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
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. 2012 Mar;116(3):629-36. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e318246ea34.
Butler PJ, Dhara SS. Prediction of difficult laryngoscopy: an assessment of the thyromental distance and Mallampati predictive tests. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1992 May;20(2):139-42. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9202000202.
Garza AG, Gratton MC, Coontz D, Noble E, Ma OJ. Effect of paramedic experience on orotracheal intubation success rates. J Emerg Med. 2003 Oct;25(3):251-6. doi: 10.1016/s0736-4679(03)00198-7.
Khan ZH, Kashfi A, Ebrahimkhani E. A comparison of the upper lip bite test (a simple new technique) with modified Mallampati classification in predicting difficulty in endotracheal intubation: a prospective blinded study. Anesth Analg. 2003 Feb;96(2):595-9, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200302000-00053.
Lascarrou JB, Boisrame-Helms J, Bailly A, Le Thuaut A, Kamel T, Mercier E, Ricard JD, Lemiale V, Colin G, Mira JP, Meziani F, Messika J, Dequin PF, Boulain T, Azoulay E, Champigneulle B, Reignier J; Clinical Research in Intensive Care and Sepsis (CRICS) Group. Video Laryngoscopy vs Direct Laryngoscopy on Successful First-Pass Orotracheal Intubation Among ICU Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017 Feb 7;317(5):483-493. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.20603.
Lewis SR, Butler AR, Parker J, Cook TM, Smith AF. Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 15;11(11):CD011136. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011136.pub2.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
Related Info
Related Info
Related Info
Related Info
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2023/1011
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.