A Comparative study of the efficacy of Glidescope versus Macintosh direct laryngoscopy for intubation in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery

A Comparative study of the efficacy of Glidescope versus Macintosh direct laryngoscopy for intubation in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery - efficacy of Glidescope versus Macintosh direct laryngoscopy for intubation in pediatric patients

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000044474

Enrollment

Registered

2021-06-22

Start date

2019-08-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

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

Conditions

pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery

Interventions

The anesthetic techniques were standardized

patients were premedicated via oral midazolam 0.5 mg/kg IV. Induction of anesthesia was done via Ketamine 1.5- 2.5mg/kg IV, Fentanyl 2-10 ug/kg. Endotracheal intubation was performed using Rocuronium

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: - patients undergoing cardiac surgery for the repair of congenital heart disease. - The patient's body weight had to be within the range of 3 to 30 kg

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: suspected difficult intubation, preterm babies with low body weight, and patients at risk of aspiration were all excluded

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
compare the efficacy of the Glidescope (video-laryngoscope) against the Macintosh direct laryngoscope	—

Countries

Asia(except Japan)

Contacts

Public ContactIbrahim Zabani

King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center Anesthesiology

izabani@gmail.com00966504654717

Outcome results

None listed

Source: JPRN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jul 3, 2026