Methods of securing a definitive airway in Cervical spine injured patients

Comparative evaluation of tracheal intubation using airtraq and intubating laryngeal mask airway with cervical spine immobilisation

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2018/05/013870

Enrollment

100

Registered

2018-05-14

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- patients admitted for elective surgeries

Interventions

Intervention1: Airtraq: Airtraq is an optical laryngoscope designed to facilitate intubation Control Intervention1: Intubating Laryngeal Mask Airway: It is an advanced type of LMA airway device is an

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. ASA I and II 2. Age between 18 and 60 years 3. Undergoing elective surgery 4. Modified Mallampati grade I and II 5. BMI

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patients with cervical spine or oral pathology 2. Airway distortion(post burn contracture) 3. Mouth opening less than 3cm 4. Pregnant Patients

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Time taken for intubation was defined as time taken from holding airway device for insertion to the first square shaped capnographTimepoint: Time taken for intubation was defined as time taken from holding airway device for insertion to the first square shaped capnograph	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Number of attempts taken Ease of intubation with the device (Airtraq/ILMA) as graded by Likert scale. Hemodynamic variables(HR,MAP) Complications if any (trauma to oropharyngeal structures, blood stains on device/ETT)Timepoint: 1) . In the ILMA group it was seen that the airway device was inserted in first attempt in 88% of patients while in rest of the patients (12%), a second attempt was needed. In the Airtraq group, airway of all patients (100%) was successfully secured in the first attempt 2) Likert scale of 3 was for the ILMA group while 4 was given for Airtraq group by the operator 3) Blood stain on removal of the ILMA device was seen in 2 patients as compared to none seen in the Airtraq group.	—

Measure

Time frame

Number of attempts taken Ease of intubation with the device (Airtraq/ILMA) as graded by Likert scale. Hemodynamic variables(HR,MAP) Complications if any (trauma to oropharyngeal structures, blood stains on device/ETT)Timepoint: 1) . In the ILMA group it was seen that the airway device was inserted in first attempt in 88% of patients while in rest of the patients (12%), a second attempt was needed. In the Airtraq group, airway of all patients (100%) was successfully secured in the first attempt 2) Likert scale of 3 was for the ILMA group while 4 was given for Airtraq group by the operator 3) Blood stain on removal of the ILMA device was seen in 2 patients as compared to none seen in the Airtraq group.

—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Sivaraj

Maulana Azad Medical College and Associated Lok Nayak Hospital

soniawadhawan@hotmail.com9810946845

Outcome results

None listed

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