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

Intraocular Pressure Clinical Trial

— IOP  

Official title:

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

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03279172
• Other study ID #: 22051012
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: August 7, 2017
• Last updated: September 11, 2017
• Start date: January 1, 2017
• Est. completion date: August 4, 2017

Study information

• Verified date: September 2017
• Source: Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

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

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.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 78
• Est. completion date: August 4, 2017
• Est. primary completion date: August 3, 2017
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 65 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Elective Surgery under general anaesthesia

Exclusion Criteria:

• History of Glaucoma

• History of hearth disease

• History of Alzheimer

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Intraocular Pressure
• Intubation;Difficult

Intervention

Procedure:
• direct laryngoscope
procedure entubation
• videolaryngoscope

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Turkey	University of Health Diskapi Yildirim Beyazit Training and Hospital	Ankara	Altindag

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Turkey, 

References & Publications (2)

Griesdale DE, Liu D, McKinney J, Choi PT. Glidescope® 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. Review. — View Citation

Vinayagam S, Dhanger S, Tilak P, Gnanasekar R. C-MAC(®) 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. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	High intraorbital pressure	IOP 18-22 mmHg	1 minute