Orotracheal Intubation with the ORION Videolaryngoscope Versus the King Vision Videolaryngoscope in Adult Patients: ORION Trial

The video laryngoscope, compared to direct laryngoscopy, provides better visualization of the laryngeal and glottic structures, a higher success rate for intubation on the first attempt, and a lower incidence of complications such as mucosal injury, dental injury, and esophageal intubations. Despite the advantages offered by video laryngoscopy, its use is not widespread in developing countries due to high costs. For this reason, the ORION video laryngoscope was developed as a low-cost, reusable device that can undergo high-level disinfection. It is designed using additive manufacturing and meets the standards for biocompatibility, rigidity, and resistance. Additionally, it has undergone preclinical testing in simulation models where anesthesiologists have approved its use in real clinical scenarios. In this study, patients scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia without predictors of difficult airway will be included and randomized to be intubated with either the ORION video laryngoscope or the King Vision video laryngoscope. The study will compare the success of intubation on the first attempt, the time taken for intubation, the level of visualization of the glottic structures, and the associated complications between the two video laryngoscopes.

Inclusion criteria

• Patients over 18 years of age scheduled for elective surgery requiring general anesthesia.
• Patients without predictors of difficult airway.
• Patients with ASA I-II classification.
• Patients with BMI less than 35 kg/mts2.

Exclusion criteria

• Pregnant women.
• Patients requiring emergency surgery.
• Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
• Patients with a history of chronic ischemic heart disease.
• Patients with a history of asthma.
• Patients who have not signed the informed consent to participate in the study.