View clinical trials related to Failed or Difficult Intubation.
Filter by:To compare two hybrid techniques, flexible bronchoscopy-guided intubation with a video laryngoscope and flexible bronchoscopy-guided intubation with a laryngeal mask, that have recently shown promise as a way to increase first-attempt success rates and reduce complications in children with anticipated difficult intubation.
We will conduct this study to show that it is possible to deliver air through a Frova bougie and an Ambu® bag.
C-MAC videolaryngoscope (Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, GERMANY) with its Macintosh like blade is used with standard direct laryngoscopy technique. KingsVisionTM videolaryngoscopes (KingSystems, IN, USA) have also Macintosh like single use blades that are channeled, wider and shorter than conventional Macintosh blades.We aim to compare these two laryngoscopes and Macintosh laryngoscope during routine intubation in adult patients.
A difficult tracheal intubation can be a problem, even if one has taken all precautions. A possible solution can be using a videolaryngoscope in conjunct with the Bonfils® intubation scope. As such, the videolaryngoscope can be used to achieve the best possible view and space of the laryngeal inlet for the insertion and manoeuvring of the Bonfils® intubation scope.
The purpose of this study is to identify differences in craniofacial morphology and tongue size between patients who have a history of difficult airway management and a control group of patients who had an uneventful airway management during induction of general anesthesia. In this study the investigators want to validate the hypothesis that there are craniofacial phenotypic differences between patients who have a history of difficult airway management and a control group of patients who have had an uneventful airway management during the induction of general anesthesia.
Water method with water exchange has been shown to reduce medication requirement and pain experienced during colonoscopy. It increases the success rate of cecal intubation in sedated and unsedated patients undergoing screening colonoscopy. Exchange of water during scope insertion minimizes distension of the colonic lumen and decreases loop formation. Exclusion of air from the colon during insertion by omission of air insufflations and suction removal of residual air prevent elongation of the colon. These maneuvers facilitate colonoscopy insertion in average patients and may enhance the success of difficult colonoscopy. Colonoscopy has been considered the gold standard procedure in screening for colorectal disease. However, 5-10% of colonoscopies are incomplete due to patient discomfort, difficult anatomy and prior abdominal or pelvic surgery. The investigators postulate that these patients may benefit from using the water method for colonoscopy. In this proposal the investigators test the hypothesis that compared with conventional air insufflations the water method with water exchange significantly enhances the success rate of cecal intubation in patients with immediately failed colonoscopy. The aim of the study is to compare the outcome of colonoscopy using the water method versus the conventional air method in patients with incomplete colonoscopy. The primary outcome is cecal intubation success rate. The secondary outcomes include cecal intubation time, maximum pain score during colonoscopy, overall pain score after colonoscopy and adenoma detection rate.