Skip to content

Duble Lumen Intubation

Evaluation of the Double-Lumen Tube Vivasight-DL vs. Standard Duble-lumen Tube in Normal and Difficult Airway Scenarios: A Prospective, Randomized, Crossover, Simulation Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03624439
Enrollment
47
Registered
2018-08-10
Start date
2018-08-07
Completion date
2019-06-30
Last updated
2019-07-31

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

Conditions

Difficult Airway, Intubation;Difficult, Intubation; Difficult or Failed

Keywords

double-lumen tube, ETView, medical simulation, anesthesiologist, difficult airway

Brief summary

Intrabronal intubation is one of the basic methods of airway protection during cardiac surgery. The use of double-lumen tubes in the implementation of a standard method based on macintosh laryngoscope may cause the prolongation of the procedure especially in the case of difficult airways. The aim of the study was to match the effectiveness of endotracheal intubation using a standard Macontosh laryngskop and a normal double-lumen tube versus the ETView DL tube.

Interventions

intubation using standard double-lumen tube with Macintosh laryngoscope

DEVICEDouble-Lumen Tube Vivasight-DL

intubation using Double-Lumen Video Tube Vivasight-DL with Macintosh laryngoscope

Sponsors

Lazarski University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* anesthesiologist or a person in the course of specialization * consent voluntary participation in the study

Exclusion criteria

* refusal to participate in the study

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
intubation time1 dayfrom taking of the intubation device to successful intubation

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
success of the first intubation trial1 dayeffectiveness of the first attempt of intubation by participants using four intubation devices
overall success rate1 dayeffectiveness measured during a maximum of three intubation attempts, confirmed by a single lung ventilation test
time to visualize the glottis1 daytime defined as the time from taking laryngoscope in hand until you obtain visualize the glottis
Cormack - Lehane grade1 dayself-reported percentage the vocal cord visualization using the Cormack-Lehane grading (grade 1-4)
ease of use1 dayTo access subjective opinions about the difficulty of the each intubation method, participants were asked to give a rating on a visual analogue scale (VAS) with a score from 1 (extremely easy) to 100 (extremely difficult).
the degree of visibility of the glottis1 dayThe POGO score describes how much glottic opening is visible. A POGO score of 100% indicates visualization of the entire glottic opening from the anterior commissure of the vocal cords to the interarytenoid notch. A POGO score of 0% corresponds with no visualization of laryngeal structures.

Countries

Poland

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026