Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 1082 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
Ahead of Print

A comparative evaluation of hemodynamic response and ease of intubation using Airtraq and McCoy laryngoscope


1 Department of Anaesthesiology, AIIMS, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
2 Department of Critical Care, Sunshine Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India

Correspondence Address:
Indraprava Mandal,
Plot No – 437/3134, Flat No- 403, AIIMS Road, Patrapada, Bhubaneswar - 751 019, Odisha
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_43_19

Background: Various airway gadgets have been devised to overcome difficult airway scenario in anesthesia practice. It includes simple rigid laryngoscope to complex fiber-optic intubating devices; however, there is weak evidence to support the superiority of one device over the other. Aims and Objective: The ease of intubation, time and the hemodynamic variability between two groups during intubation are considered as the primary outcome measures. Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, 60 patients of either sex undergoing elective surgery who required tracheal intubation were included. All the patients of age between 20 and 50 years with the American Society of Anesthesiologists Classes I and II were divided into the following two groups: Group AT (n = 30): the intubation was performed using AT laryngoscope and Group-MC (n = 30); the intubation was performed using MC laryngoscope. The following intubating parameters were recorded: ease of intubation (Grade-I–IV), mean time of laryngoscopy and intubation, Cormack–Lehane grade, and the percentage of glottis opening (POGO) score. The vital parameters such as heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MABP) were recorded only after premedication, and it was taken as the baseline value. These parameters were again recorded at 1 min, 3 min, 5 min, and 10 min after laryngoscopy and intubation. The incidences of sore throat were recorded just before discharge from the recovery room till 24 h of surgery. All these parameters were compared between these two groups using the Student's t-test and Chi-square test. Results: There was no significant difference in age, sex, weight, and Mallampati grading between the two groups. More than 30% of patients in Group AT were intubated without an external aid than the Group MC (P < 0.05). In Group AT, the mean time of intubation was 13.5 ± 5.72 s when compared to 15.63 ± 7.28 s in Group MC (P > 0.05). The Cormack–Lehane grade and POGO score were better in the AT group than that of the MC group. The HR at 1 min in Group AT was 101.83 ± 14.50 and in Group MC, it was 108.93 ± 12.86 (P < 0.05) and after 3 min, it was 98.66 ± 12.60 and 111.53 ± 11.67 (P < 0.05), respectively. The MABP was 107.17 ± 9.03 in Group AT compared to 116 ± 10.12 in Group MC (P < 0.05) at 1 min postintubation. The incidences of sore throat were similar in both the groups. Conclusion: The AT laryngoscope is better than MC in terms of the ease of intubation, better glottis view, and hemodynamic stability. However, the incidences of sore throat in both groups were comparable.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Sahoo AK
    -  Majhi K
    -  Mandal I
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed122    
    PDF Downloaded7    

Recommend this journal