Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 514 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 581-585

Suitability of nasotracheal intubation using King Vision and TruviewPCD video laryngoscopes: A randomized clinical trial


Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth (Deemed-to be- University), Puducherry, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Vadlamudi Reddy Hemanth Kumar
Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth (Deemed-to be- University), Puducherry - 607 403
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_68_18

Rights and Permissions

Background: Several video laryngoscopes had demonstrated their superiority over conventional oral and nasal intubation techniques. King Vision video laryngoscope has fewer studies supporting its suitability for oral intubations. However, its suitability as a nasal intubating device has not been yet evaluated. We evaluated the suitability of King Vision video laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation comparing with TruviewPCD. Methods: Eighty American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade I and II elective surgical patients were studied. After meeting the inclusion criteria, 80 study subjects were randomized into two groups. Group T were intubated using TruviewPCD and Group K were intubated with the nonchanneled King Vision video laryngoscope. Our primary outcome was single successful nasotracheal intubation without use of any additional maneuvers. The time taken for intubation, use of additional maneuverers, Cormack-Lehane grading, and hemodynamics were also analyzed. Results: Seventy-one patients (88.75%) were successfully intubated in a single attempt, i.e. 35 patients (90%) in Group K and 36 patients (87.5%) in Group T. Intubation time (mean ± standard deviation) was 67.9 ± 24.1 s in Group T and 64.9 ± 20.0 s in Group K where comparison was not statistically significant (P = 0.5). The additional maneuvers (P = 0.2) and hemodynamic changes were not clinically significant. There were no associated serious complications. Conclusion: King Vision video laryngoscope is just as effective as TruviewPCD video laryngoscope for successful nasotracheal intubation.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1055    
    Printed5    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded71    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal