FindTrial
Sign In

Comparison between two Video Laryngoscope

A Prospective Randomized Study To Compare King Vision Video Laryngoscope And McGrath Video Laryngoscope In Adults Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2018/03/012378
Enrollment
60
Registered
2018-03-06
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: null- ASA Physical Status I and II

Interventions

Intervention1: King Vision Video laryngoscope and McGrath Video laryngoscope: Intubation time comparison Control Intervention1: McGrath Video laryngoscope: Intubation time comparison

Sponsors

Department Of Anaesthesiology
Lead Sponsor
Qazi Ehsan Ali
Collaborator

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: ASA Grade I and II Weight between 40-70 Kg Patients planned for Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Previous history of multiple/ failed intubation. Head and neck surgery. Valvular heart disease. CAD / Uncontrolled hypertension. Presence of raised intracranial pressure. Cervical spine injury. Previous history of multiple/ failed intubation. Head and neck surgery. Valvular heart disease. CAD / Uncontrolled hypertension. Presence of raised intracranial pressure. Cervical spine injury. Predicted difficult laryngoscopy except for all class of MP Grades Any pathology of the oral cavity that will obstruct the insertion of device. Mouth opening Potentially full stomach patients (trauma, morbid obesity, pregnancy, history of gastric regurgitation and heart burn) and at risk of esophageal reflux (hiatus hernia).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To compare the laryngoscopy & intubation time using the two devices. To compare the glottic view using POGO (percentage of glottic opening) score. To compare the hemodynamic response i.e., heart rate and mean arterial B.P. after laryngoscopy and intubation. To compare the success of laryngoscopy & intubation in all classes of Mallampati grading. Timepoint: Two years from start of study—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
To grade the ease of tracheal intubation using these devices. To compare the number of adjustment maneuvers required for successful intubation. To look for post operative complications if any.Timepoint: 2 yrs—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactMohammad Ahmad Khan

JNMCH AMU ALIGARH

hussainamir77@gmail.com8218496722

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026