Comparison of endotracheal intubation time in neutral position between C-Mac(®) and Airtraq(®) laryngoscopes: A prospective randomised study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the recent past, many novel devices such as AirTraq(®) and C-MAC(®) video laryngoscope (VL) have been introduced in an attempt to reduce anaesthetic morbidity and mortality associated with difficult intubation. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare C-MAC(®) VL with a standard Macintosh blade and the AirTraq(®) optical laryngoscope as a intubating devices with the patient's head in neutral position. METHODS: Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologist Physical Status I–II patients were randomly assigned to be intubated with C-MAC(®) VL (Group CM; n = 30) or AirTraq(®) (Group AT; n = 30) in the neutral position, with or without the application of optimization manoeuvres. The primary outcomes of this study were the success rate and the time taken to intubate. Glottic view, ease of tracheal intubation and haemodynamic responses were considered as secondary end points. RESULTS: The incidence of successful intubation was similar in both the groups (P = 1.00). However, the time for intubation was significantly less with C-MAC(®) VL (Group CM = 14.9 ± 12.89 s, Group AT = 26.3 ± 13.34 s; P = 0.0014). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of ease of intubation and glottic view. However, the haemodynamic perturbations were much less with C-MAC(®) VL. CONCLUSION: We conclude that both the devices were similar in visualising larynx in the neutral position with similar success rates of intubation. However, the C-MAC(®) VL was better with respect to intubation time and haemodynamic stability.