• Users Online: 116
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 168-172

A comparative study between the macintosh laryngoscope and the king vision video laryngoscope in endotracheal intubation


Department of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Ahmed M Elfadly
Department of Anaesthesia and Surgical Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, 313 Elhorreya st Sporting Alexandria, Alexandria
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2356-9115.195881

Rights and Permissions

Background Airway management remains a vital primary skill for anaesthesiologists. We aimed at comparing the efficacy of direct laryngoscopy using the conventional Macintosh blade with indirect laryngoscopy using the King Vision video laryngoscope (KVVL) with regard to visualization of the laryngeal view, speed of intubation and intubation success rate. Patients and methods A total of 100 adult patients were randomly categorized into two equal groups (50 patients each): group M patients were subjected to general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation using direct laryngoscopy with the conventional Macintosh blade; and group K patients were subjected to general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation using the KVVL; the entire procedure of laryngoscopy and intubation was evaluated and all patients were intubated by one anaesthetist experienced in the use of each laryngoscope. Results The KVVL performed better in these patients by reducing haemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation, improving the Cormack and Lehane glottis view, reducing the need for optimization manoeuvres and reducing the difficulty Likert scale score compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope (ML). There were no differences in intubation time, success rates and complications between both devices. Conclusion This study validated the efficacy of the KVVL compared with the direct ML. The KVVL performed better than the ML.


[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
    Viewed413    
    Printed5    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded102    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal