title: Comparison of LMA CTrach and Video Laryngoscope in Endotracheal Intubation.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  In this study, our objective was to compare the Cormack and Lehane (C-L) sight scores of direct laryngoscopy in endotracheal intubation with the endoscopic sight scores of the LMA CTrach and video laryngoscope. We also compared the success of endoscopy with the LMA CTrach and video laryngoscopy, intubation time, and its effects on haemodynamic and stress responses.
  
  
  METHODS
  The study included 100 patients, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores I-III and aged 18-65, who will undergo elective surgery. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group C and Group V. The patients in both groups underwent direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh laryngoscope, and their C-L scores were recorded. In Group C, the patients were intubated with the LMA CTrach, and in Group V, the patients were intubated with a video laryngoscope. Patients' haemodynamic parameters, oxygen saturation, end-tidal carbondioxide, and endoscopic sight scores were recorded.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The demographic characteristics and the ASA classifications of the groups were similar. When endoscopic sight scores were compared with C-L, better sight was obtained in the LMA CTrach group; no significant difference was detected in Group V. Regarding the success of the intubation, no significant difference was detected between groups. However, when intubation times were compared, there was a significant difference between groups. The intubation time was longer in Group C. There was no difference between groups in terms of the percentage changes of haemodynamic parameters, oxygen saturation, and end-tidal carbondioxide values of the patients.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this study, when endoscopic sight scores were compared, better visualization was obtained in the LMA CTrach group. Therefore, in cases where intubation is difficult to apply in patients, the LMA CTrach can be an alternative application.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Nevzat
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Gümüş
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Ahmet
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Dilek
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Fatma
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Ülger
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Ersin
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Köksal
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Erhan Çetin
authors.initials: EÇ
authors.lastname: Çetinoğlu
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Fatih
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Özkan
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
authors.forename: Fuat
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Güldoğuş
keywords: LMA CTrach; endoscopic sight scores; endotracheal intubation; video laryngoscope