• Users Online: 583
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 22-28

Comparative study between C-MAC, Air Traq laryngoscope, and Air Q in adult patients


1 Department of Anesthesiology, ICU and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
2 Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Management, Faculty of Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
3 Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
MD Enas M Ashrey
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine for Girls, Al-Azhar University, (11517), Alzahraa University Hospital Abbasia, Cairo
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/sjamf.sjamf_106_19

Get Permissions

Introduction Airway management is one of the cornerstones of anesthesia. The role of airway assessment is very important for airway management. So many devices have been introduced to improve tracheal intubation such as C-MAC video laryngoscopes (C-MAC VL) and Air Traq. Also, some of supraglottic airway devices have been modified for endotracheal intubation like Air Q intubating laryngeal mask airway. Aim The aim of the study was to compare C-MAC, Air Traq laryngoscopes, and Air Q in terms of hemodynamic changes such as primary outcome, and ease of intubation, success rate and intubation time, number of attempts, complications, and incidence of esophageal intubation such as secondary outcome, in patients who need tracheal intubation for elective surgeries. Patients and methods A total of 60 adult patients aged 21–65 years, with the American Society of Anesthesiology I, II, Mallampati I, II scheduled for elective tracheal intubation, were divided into three equal groups in a randomized controlled manner: group CM (n=20) intubation was done with C-MAC VL; group AT (n=20) intubation was done with Air Traq; group AQ (n=20): intubation was done with Air Q. Results There was statistically significant prolongation in the duration of intubation in the AQ group followed by AT group and then CM group. Ease of intubation, decrease in the number of attempts, and success rate were similar in CM, AT groups. In contrast, the AQ group showed difficulty in intubation and the failure rate was 15% (P=0.043). No complication or incidence of esophageal intubation occurred during intubation with the CM group or AT group, but AQ group showed increased incidence of esophageal intubation in 15% of patients. Conclusion We concluded that C-MAC VL is a more superior, easier, and protective method of safe intubation followed by Air Traq optical laryngoscope proved by ease of intubation, shorter time of intubation, and number of intubation needed with no incidence of esophageal intubation than Air Q intubating laryngeal mask.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed160    
    Printed14    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded46    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal