MedDataX Logo

Effect of Video Laryngoscopy Versus Conventional Laryngoscopy Upon Hemodynamics

NCT ID: NCT07300878

Last Updated: 2025-12-24

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

PHASE4

Total Enrollment

208 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-12-22

Study Completion Date

2026-06-22

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

In general anestheisa airway is secured by passing a tube down the widpipe. This helps the patient to breath via ventilator during anesthesia. For placing this tube laryngoscopy is done which results in increase in blood pressure and heart rate. This study will compare the rise in blood pressure and heart rate among when using video laryngoscope with conventional laryngoscope.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In this study Patients will be randomly divided into two groups with group V patients being intubated using Videolaryngoscope while group M patients will be intubated using Macintosh laryngoscope. The amount of rise in blood pressure and heart rate as a result of laryngoscopy will be noted.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Laryngoscopic Stress Response Video Laryngoscopy Conventional Laryngoscopy

Keywords

Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.

Laryngoscopic stress response Video laryngoscopy Conventional laryngoscopy

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

PREVENTION

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Video laryngoscopy

Patient in this group will be intubated using hyperangulated C MAC video laryngoscope

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

C MAC hyperangulated video laryngoscopy

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patient will be intubated using hyperangulated C MAC video laryngoscope

Conventional Laryngoscopy

Patient in this group will be intubated using conventional macintosh laryngoscopic blade

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Conventional macintosh laryngoscopy

Intervention Type DEVICE

Patient in this group will be intubated using conventional macintosh laryngoscopy

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

C MAC hyperangulated video laryngoscopy

Patient will be intubated using hyperangulated C MAC video laryngoscope

Intervention Type DEVICE

Conventional macintosh laryngoscopy

Patient in this group will be intubated using conventional macintosh laryngoscopy

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Elective surgeries under General Endotracheal Anesthesia. ASA class I and II.

Exclusion Criteria

* Pregnancy

* Body mass index \>35 kg/m2
* No teeth
* Maxillofacial trauma
* Limited Cervical spine movement
* Upper Airway Tumors
* Preoperative assessment indicating difficult airway requiring use of video laryngoscope or fiberoptic intubation.
Minimum Eligible Age

16 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences

OTHER_GOV

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Muhammad Haroon Anwar

Principal Investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Deparment of Anesthesia PIMS

Islamabad, , Pakistan

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Pakistan

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Wang L, Li H, Zhong Y, Ye S, Deng J, Pan T, Zhang Y. Comparative Analysis of Hemodynamic Responses and Oropharyngeal Complications in Tracheal Intubation: Evaluating Conventional, Video, and Rigid Video Laryngoscopes Under General Anesthesia. Med Sci Monit. 2024 Sep 5;30:e944916. doi: 10.12659/MSM.944916.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 39233395 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

F.5.2/2024(ERRC)/PIMS

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id