FindTrial
Sign In

Comparative Study Between Hugemed Flexible Video Laryngoscope Versus C Mac Video Laryngoscope For Efficacy Of Tracheal Intubation.

A Comparative Evaluation Between Hugemed Flexible Video Laryngoscope Versus C Mac Video Laryngoscope For Efficacy Of Tracheal Intubation In Anticipated Difficult Intubation. - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2025/07/092086
Enrollment
70
Registered
2025-07-31
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-08-18

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

Conditions

Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical Health Condition 2: O- Medical and Surgical

Interventions

Intervention1: Hugemed Flexible Video Laryngoscope For Efficacy Of Successful Tracheal Intubation In Anticipated Difficult Intubation.: Hugemed Flexible Video Laryngoscope Time Required For Successfu

Sponsors

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical care Jawaharlal Nehru medical College and hospital
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients Planned For Elective Surgery Under General Anaesthesia. Predicted Difficult Laryngoscopy And Intubation With Mallampati Grade 3 or 4.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients With Obstructing Laryngeal Lesion Such As Cancer. Patients With Laryngeal or Craniofacial Trauma. Mouth Opening Less Than 2.5 Mallampati Grade 1 and 2

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Time Required For Efficacy Of Successful Tracheal Intubation.Timepoint: 4 weeks—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
NILTimepoint: NIL—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactProf Qazi Ehsan Ali

Jawaharlal Nehru medical College, Aligarh Muslim University

qaziehsanali@gmail.com7417701769

Outcome results

None listed

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