A clinical trial compares the ease of intubation of two types of Laryngoscopes: Tuoren video laryngoscope and another flexible Ambu scope in patients with cervical spinal cord injury.

Comparison of the Tuoren video laryngoscope to a flexible Ambu scope for intubation in patients at risk of secondary cervical spine injury: A Pilot Study. - NIL

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 4

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2023/09/057229

Enrollment

Registered

2023-09-04

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2024-12-09

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

Conditions

Health Condition 1: G55- Nerve root and plexus compressionsin diseases classified elsewhere Health Condition 2: G55- Nerve root and plexus compressionsin diseases classified elsewhere Health Condition 3: G55- Nerve root and plexus compressionsin diseases classified elsewhere Health Condition 4: G55- Nerve root and plexus compressionsin diseases classified elsewhere Health Condition 5: G55- Nerve root and plexus compressionsin diseases classified elsewhere

Interventions

Intervention1: Tuoren Video laryngoscope: Tuoren Video laryngoscope will be used for intubation in patients with chance of secondary cervical spinal cord injury during intubation posted for spinal fix

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients > 18 years, ASA physical status I – III, Patients having cervical spinal cord injury requiring intubation.After obtaining Written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: ASA Grade 4 or more. Patient refusal Patients at increased risk of aspiration Predicted difficult intubation

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
1. Time following initial insertion of the laryngoscope blade a. To obtain the glottic view ( in seconds) b. To obtain the CO2 waveform immediately following intubation( in seconds) Timepoint: Only a single time while performing intubation	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. Number of intubation attempts 2. POGO (Percentage of glottic opening) score at Laryngoscopy 3. Need to change the intubation device 4. The Number of operators 5. Number of optimization maneuvers (jaw thrust, laryngeal pressure) 6. Use of adjuvant airway device (Bougie, LMA) 7. Hemodynamic values MAP, HR, SPO2 (at baseline, time of intubation, & 3, 5 minutes after intubation) 8. Incidences of lip, dental injury Timepoint: 5 minutes following intubation	—

Measure

Time frame

1. Number of intubation attempts 2. POGO (Percentage of glottic opening) score at Laryngoscopy 3. Need to change the intubation device 4. The Number of operators 5. Number of optimization maneuvers (jaw thrust, laryngeal pressure) 6. Use of adjuvant airway device (Bougie, LMA) 7. Hemodynamic values MAP, HR, SPO2 (at baseline, time of intubation, & 3, 5 minutes after intubation) 8. Incidences of lip, dental injury Timepoint: 5 minutes following intubation

—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Subhasree Das

All India Institute Of Medical Sciences, BHUBANESWAR

drkakalee@gmail.com7978885193

Outcome results

None listed

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