Comparison of the Airtraq laryngoscope and the GlideScope for double-lumen tube intubation in patients with predicted normal airways: a prospective randomized trial.
BACKGROUND
The Airtraq laryngoscope and the GlideScope are commonly used in many airway scenarios. However, their features have not been fully described for double-lumen tube intubation. A prospective randomized study was designed to compare their intubation performances in thoracic surgery patients.


METHODS
Seventy ASA physical status I and II patients with predicted normal airway were scheduled for thoracic surgeries with double-lumen tube intubation. They were randomly assigned to one of two groups and intubated with either the Airtraq laryngoscope (group A, n = 35) or the GlideScope (group G, n = 35). Airway assessments were performed prior to anesthesia, and all patients were induced with a standard anesthetic regimen. The Cormack-Lehane grades were initially evaluated with a Macintosh laryngoscope and subsequently with the group-specific laryngoscope before intubation. Intubation time was recorded as the primary outcome. The Cormack-Lehane grade, the success of the first intubation attempt, the intubation difficulty scales and ease of tube advancement were noted. Hemodynamic variables during intubation and incidence of post-operative sore throat were documented as well.


RESULTS
The intubation time of group A was shorter than that of group G (36.6 ± 20.2 s vs. 54.6 ± 25.7 s, p = 0.002). The Cormack-Lehane grade (I/II/III/IV) was significantly better in group A (33/2/0/0 vs. 28/7/0/0, p = 0.042). The mean arterial pressure and heart rate rose to higher levels during intubation with the GlideScope than with the Airtraq laryngoscope. The success of the first intubation attempt and the intubation difficulty scales were comparable between the two groups. The numbers of patients who experienced postoperative sore throat were similar (6 vs. 8) in the two groups.


CONCLUSIONS
Compared with the GlideScope, the specially designed Airtraq laryngoscope might be more suitable for double-lumen tube intubations in patients with predicted normal airway.


BACKGROUND
www.chictr.org Identifier: ChiCTR-TRC-11001628.
Department of Anesthesiology, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, No.1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Street, Beijing, 100730, P.R of China. easyue@163.com.
Jie
J
Yi
Department of Anesthesiology, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, No.1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Street, Beijing, 100730, P.R of China. yh2087@163.com.
Yahong
Y
Gong
Department of Anesthesiology, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, No.1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Street, Beijing, 100730, P.R of China. quan79102@188.com.
Xiang
X
Quan
Department of Anesthesiology, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, No.1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Street, Beijing, 100730, P.R of China. garybeijing@163.com.
Yuguang
Y
Huang
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001794:Blood Pressure / Q000502:physiology; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D006339:Heart Rate / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D007442:Intubation, Intratracheal / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000592:standards; D020704:Laryngoscopes / Q000592:standards*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D061646:Operative Time; D011446:Prospective Studies; D019616:Thoracic Surgical Procedures / Q000295:instrumentation*; D055815:Young Adult