Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01865643

A Comparison of Two GlideScope Intubation Techniques

The aim of this study is to compare the hemodynamic response to tracheal intubations using the standard technique versus the alternative GS intubation technique. As secondary outcomes the investigators will analyze procedure time, success rate and injury rate.

The investigators hypothesize that the alternative intubation technique will have a shorter procedure time and lower injury rate when compared to the standard technique of GS intubation.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–65 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Mount Sinai Hospital

Toronto, Ontario, M5G1X5, Canada

About this study

A Difficult intubation is still one of the most daunting challenges in anesthesiology. One of the tools used to assist with a difficult tracheal intubation is the GlideScope (GS) (Verathon, Bothell, WA, USA). The GS is a video laryngoscope that has a 60 degree angle blade with a built-in high-resolution camera and a light source assembled beside it. The image is transmitted onto a mobile bedside monitor. It has been widely used in medicine for over a decade. The GS was designed to provide an improved view of the glottis during difficult intubations without alignment of the oral, pharyngeal and tracheal axes, as it is able to "look around the corner" to facilitate the intubation.

The standard technique of the GS intubation involves a midline laryngoscopy followed by the insertion of a styleted endotracheal tube (ETT) once an adequate view of the vocal cords has been achieved. The ETT insertion process requires the operator to look away from the monitor during the laryngoscopy while maintaining the blade position in order to insert it into its initial position.

An alternative GS intubation technique has been described for cases in which there is limited mouth opening, a big tongue or other anatomical impediments. In these cases the ETT is inserted under direct vision as a "fish hook" at the side of the mouth before the GS blade is introduced into the oropharynx.

There are several advantages to this alternative technique. The first advantage is that this technique of ETT insertion would minimize the laryngoscopy time as a part of it is performed before the blade is introduced and the stimulating effect occurs. This technique thus has the potential of reducing the sympathetic response. Minimizing oropharyngo-laryngeal stimulation time would theoretically attenuate the hemodynamic response.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients of ASA physical status 1-2
  • Patients aged 18 years and older
  • Patients undergoing elective surgery that requires tracheal intubation

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients in whom a rapid sequence intubation or alternative intubation method is indicated
  • Patients with a known or suspected oral, pharyngeal or laryngeal mass
  • Patients previously flagged as a difficult intubation
  • Patients with hypertension (treated or untreated, poor dentition, symptomatic gastro-esophageal reflux or cervical spine instability

Treatment and study plan

Glidescope

Device

The GlideScope is used to assist with difficult tracheal intubation.

Primary outcomes

  1. Hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation

    Time frame: 24 hours

    Heart rate and non-invasive blood pressure will be measured before induction, and throughout and after laryngoscopy and induction

Secondary outcomes

  1. Procedure time

    Time frame: 10 minutes

    Time for intubation will be measured as time from laryngoscopy to the inflation of the ETT cuff.

  2. Success rate

    Time frame: 10 minutes

    Successful placement of endotracheal tube between the vocal cords.

  3. Injury rate

    Time frame: 30 minutes

    Injuries to the oropharynx

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Comparison of Two GlideScope Intubation Techniques - Effect on Hemodynamic Changes and Injury Rate

Important dates

Study start
2013
Primary completion
2014
Study completion
2014
First posted
May 31, 2013
Registry last updated
Aug 21, 2014

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.