Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Active, Not Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07577648

Channelled Blade Versus Non-Channelled Videolaryngoscope

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if performance of a channelled blade Astra-Vue videolaryngoscope compared to non channelled hyperangulated C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope(Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) in airway management among adults undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia. The main primary outcomes measured is the overall time taken to intubation, secondary measures includes the first attempt success rate, ease with intubation and associated complication

Participants are of adults who planned for elective or semi emergency surgery under general anesthesia. They will be screened and recruited with informed and written consent. Intubation information will be collected

Active, Not Recruiting

This study is active but is not currently recruiting participants.

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Airway Management

Age range

18 year–75 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Universiti Malaya Medical Centre

Petaling Jaya, Kuala Lumpur, 59100, Malaysia

About this study

This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the performance of a channelled videolaryngoscope (AstraVue videolaryngoscope) with a non-channelled hyperangulated videolaryngoscope (C-MAC™ D-Blade videolaryngoscope, Karl Storz, Tuttlingen, Germany) in adult patients undergoing elective or semi-emergency surgery under general anaesthesia requiring endotracheal intubation.

Participants will be randomly assigned to intubation using either the channelled AstraVue videolaryngoscope or the non-channelled C-MAC D-Blade videolaryngoscope. Standard anaesthesia induction protocols will be followed.

The primary outcome is the total time to successful intubation. Secondary outcomes include time to glottic visualization, time from glottic visualization to intubation, first-attempt success rate, number of attempts, need for external laryngeal manipulation, haemodynamic responses, and intubation-related complications.

Data will be collected prospectively during the peri-intubation period. The study aims to evaluate whether the channelled design improves intubation efficiency and success compared to the non-channelled videolaryngoscope.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Adult patients aged 18 to 70 years old requiring endotracheal intubation for elective or semi-emergency surgery under general anaesthesia
  • ASA I, II and stable ASA III patients
  • Patient with Mallampati Score Grade 1 to 3

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients with known airway abnormalities or anticipated difficult intubation,
  • Patients with desaturation before intubation,
  • Patients with high risk for aspiration requiring rapid sequence induction
  • Patient with known cervical pathology.
  • Patient refuse to participate

Treatment and study plan

channelled blade videolaryngoscope

Device

Intubation with channelled blade videolaryngoscope

Non channelled hyperangulated blade videolaryngoscope

Device

Intubation done by using Non channelled hyperangulated blade videolaryngoscope

Primary outcomes

  1. Total Time to intubation

    Time frame: During the intubation procedure (within minutes after induction of general anaesthesia)

    time from insertion of laryngoscope blade through incisor teeth to visualization of Endotracheal tube into trachea, measured in seconds

Secondary outcomes

  1. First attempt success rate

    Time frame: During the intubation procedure(within minutes after induction of general anaesthesia)

    Successful endotracheal intubation on the first attempt, measured as a proportion of total intubations(%)

  2. Time to Glottic Visualization

    Time frame: During the intubation procedure(within minutes after induction of general anaesthesia)

    time from insertion of laryngoscope blade to visualization of glottis, measured in seconds

  3. Ease of intubation

    Time frame: During the intubation procedure an immediate post-intubation period (within minutes after induction of general anaesthesia)

    Ease of intubation assessed using a modified Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS), which includes parameters such as number of attempts, additional operators, alternative techniques, lifting force, external laryngeal pressure, vocal cord position, and intubation difficulty. The total score ranges from 0 to ≥5, where a score of 0 classified as easy, 1 to 5 classified as slight difficulty, and >5 as moderate to major difficulty, generally higher score means increasing difficulty

  4. Change in Mean Arterial Pressure from baseline

    Time frame: Baseline taken during induction prior to intubation, second reading repeated at 1 minute after successful intubation

    Change in Mean arterial pressure measured at 1 minute after successful intubation, expressed as percentage change from baseline value

  5. Change in Heart rate from baseline

    Time frame: Baseline measured prior to intubation, second reading repeat at 1 minute post intubation

    Change in heart rate measured at 1 minute after succesful intubation, expressed as percentage change from baseline value

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Malaya

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparative Study of the Channelled Blade Astra-Vue Videolaryngoscope and the Non-Channelled CMAC D-Blade Videolaryngoscope in Airway Management: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
May 11, 2026
Registry last updated
May 11, 2026

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.

Related clinical trials

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