A Comparison of Videolaryngoscope and Direct Laryngoscope in IOP Changes, Throat Pain, IT and Hemodynamic Variables (IOP)

A Comparison of Videolaryngoscope and Direct Laryngoscope in Intraocular Pressure Changes, Throat Pain, Intubation Time and Hemodynamic Variables

The aim of the study was to compare intraocular pressure, intubation time, throat pain and hemodynamic variables using direct or videolaryngoscopy under general anesthesia requiring endotracheal intubation

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Intraocular Pressure; Intubation;Difficult
• Intervention / Treatment: Procedure: direct laryngoscope; Procedure: videolaryngoscope

Detailed Description

INTRODUCTION Videolaryngoscopes are the new generation devices which were introduced into the difficult intubation algorithm by the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) in 2013 (1). Videolaryngoscopes are known to be superior to traditional direct laryngoscopy in cases of difficult airway, glottic visualisation is obtained more easily and less airway trauma is seen (2). Portable videolaryngoscope which is used in difficult airways (3). There are 2, 3, and 4 numbered blades. In the light source of the blade of the videolaryngoscope, there is a camera which is connected to a video screen monitor. In addition to passing soft tissues by visualisation, the camera is helpful in defining the glottic appearance (1).

There are studies which have compared the hemodynamic response and increase in IOP in intubation using direct laryngoscope and various videolaryngoscopes and airway devices . However, to the best of our knowledge there is no study comparing the effect on the increase in IOP of videolaryngoscope and direct laryngoscope. The aim of the current study was to compare IOP, hemodynamic parameters and throat pain in the use of videolaryngoscope and the direct laryngoscope.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 78
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Turkey
  • Altındag
    • Ankara, Altındag, Turkey, 06100
      • University of Health Dıskapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Hospital

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Elective Surgery under general anaesthesia

Exclusion Criteria:

• History of Glaucoma
• History of hearth disease
• History of Alzheimer

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Group Direct Laryngoscope; direct laryngoscope (macintosh laryngoscope) is used in elective surgeries with maximal duration time for two hours. Standard anaesthesia was used on group and BIS monitorisation was applied. A record was made of IOP, hemodynamic changes and oxygen saturation at 3 and 10 minutes after intubation. Throat pain was evaluated by questioning the patient at 10 minutes and 24 hours after waking from general anaesthesia. The duration of intubation was recorded as the time from the laryngoscope entering the mouth to removal with end-tidal carbon dioxide on the monitor. Macintosh laryingoscope, BIS monitoring and tonometry would be used in Group Direct Laryngoscope.	Procedure: direct laryngoscope; procedure entubatıon; Procedure: videolaryngoscope
Experimental: Group videolaryngoscope; Videolaryngoscope is used in elective surgeries with maximal duration time for two hours. Standard anaesthesia was used on group and BIS monitorisation was applied. A record was made of IOP, hemodynamic changes and oxygen saturation at 3 and 10 minutes after intubation. Throat pain was evaluated by questioning the patient at 10 minutes and 24 hours after waking from general anaesthesia. The duration of intubation was recorded as the time from the laryngoscope entering the mouth to removal with end-tidal carbon dioxide on the monitor. Video laryingoscope, BIS monitoring and tonometry would be used in Group Video Laryngoscope.	Procedure: direct laryngoscope; procedure entubatıon; Procedure: videolaryngoscope

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
High intraorbital pressure	IOP 18-22 mmHg	1 minute

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital
• Investigators: Study Director: Ceyda Ozhan Caparlar, University of Health Dıskapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Hospital

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Griesdale DE, Liu D, McKinney J, Choi PT. Glidescope(R) video-laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. 2012 Jan;59(1):41-52. doi: 10.1007/s12630-011-9620-5. Epub 2011 Nov 1.
• Vinayagam S, Dhanger S, Tilak P, Gnanasekar R. C-MAC(R) video laryngoscope with D-BLADE and Frova introducer for awake intubation in a patient with parapharyngeal mass. Saudi J Anaesth. 2016 Oct-Dec;10(4):471-473. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.179118.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): January 1, 2017
• Primary Completion (Actual): August 3, 2017
• Study Completion (Actual): August 4, 2017

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: August 7, 2017
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 8, 2017
• First Posted (Actual): September 12, 2017

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): September 13, 2017
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 11, 2017
• Last Verified: September 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: intraocular pressure; videolaryngoscope; Direct laryngoscope
• Other Study ID Numbers: 22051012

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No