Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07351227

Pediatric Airway: Noninferiority Trial of Devices for Intubation Assessment

The goal of this clinical trial is to find out whether the BESDATA BD-DF videolaryngoscope works as well as the McGRATH™ MAC videolaryngoscope for placing a breathing tube in infants during surgery. The study will also compare the costs associated with using each device.

The main questions this study aims to answer are:

Is the BESDATA BD-DF videolaryngoscope as effective as the McGRATH™ MAC videolaryngoscope for successful placement of a breathing tube on the first attempt in infants?

Are there differences between the two devices in terms of procedure time, number of attempts, airway-related complications, and overall costs?

Researchers will compare infants who are intubated using the BESDATA BD-DF videolaryngoscope with infants who are intubated using the McGRATH™ MAC videolaryngoscope to see whether the two devices perform similarly and whether one is more cost-effective than the other.

Participants will:

Be randomly assigned to have a breathing tube placed using one of the two videolaryngoscopes;

Receive standard general anesthesia for an elective surgical procedure;

Have information collected during and after the procedure to assess safety, effectiveness, and costs.

Recruiting

Interested in participating?

Request Info

Key information

Age range

6 month–3 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Instituto da Criança e do Adolescente, Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo

São Paulo, 05403-000, Brazil

Location status: Recruiting

Location contact

Lucas F Pereira

SUB_INVESTIGATOR

Vinicius C Quintão, MD, PhD

CONTACT

[email protected]

5511971273950

About this study

Airway management in infants and young children is technically challenging and carries a higher risk of complications than in older pediatric or adult patients. Achieving successful orotracheal intubation on the first attempt is particularly important in this population due to limited oxygen reserves and increased vulnerability to hypoxia, airway trauma, and hemodynamic instability. Videolaryngoscopy has been introduced as an alternative to conventional direct laryngoscopy with the potential to improve glottic visualization and intubation success. However, evidence comparing different videolaryngoscopy devices in infants remains limited, and there is currently no consensus regarding the optimal device for this age group.

Although several videolaryngoscopes are available on the market, most comparative studies have focused on adult populations. In pediatrics, and especially in infants under one year of age, published data are scarce. The McGRATH™ MAC videolaryngoscope has been more extensively studied and is widely used in clinical practice. In contrast, the BESDATA BD-DF videolaryngoscope is a newer device with very limited clinical evidence, and no head-to-head trials have compared it with other videolaryngoscopes in children. Furthermore, despite the increasing adoption of videolaryngoscopy, the economic impact of using different devices has not been adequately investigated in pediatric settings.

This study is designed to address these gaps by comparing the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of the BESDATA BD-DF and McGRATH™ MAC videolaryngoscopes in infants undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia. The trial will evaluate whether the BESDATA device is non-inferior to the McGRATH device in terms of intubation effectiveness while also assessing relevant economic outcomes associated with each technology.

The study will be conducted as a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial at a tertiary pediatric center. Participants will be randomly allocated to undergo tracheal intubation with one of the two videolaryngoscopes. All procedures will be performed by trained anesthesiologists experienced with both devices, and data will be collected using a standardized protocol in a secure electronic database.

In addition to comparing clinical performance, the study will include an economic evaluation that considers the costs of device acquisition, required consumables, and expenses related to potential postoperative complications associated with airway management. This integrated approach aims to provide clinically meaningful and economically relevant information to support evidence-based decision-making in pediatric anesthesia.

By directly comparing two videolaryngoscopy systems in a randomized design, this trial seeks to generate high-quality evidence regarding the most effective and sustainable option for airway management in infants. The results are expected to inform clinical practice, guide resource allocation, and contribute to safer perioperative care for pediatric patients.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

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

Inclusion criteria

  • The study will include children aged between 6 months and 3 years who are scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia at the Children's Institute (Instituto da Criança - ICr) of the Hospital das Clínicas Complex, University of São Paulo Medical School (HC-FMUSP), provided that informed consent is obtained from their parents or legal guardians.

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients under one year of age will be excluded if informed consent is not obtained from their legal guardians, if they are classified as ASA physical status IV or higher, present with hemodynamic instability, or have craniofacial abnormalities or oral deformities suggestive of a potentially difficult airway.

Treatment and study plan

Intubation

Device

Intubation of pediatric patients under one year of age undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia requiring orotracheal intubation, with one or another videolaryngoscope device.

Primary outcomes

  1. First-attempt intubation success

    Time frame: From randomization until up to 15 minutes

    Proportion of participants in whom successful orotracheal intubation is achieved on the first laryngoscopy attempt using the allocated videolaryngoscope, without the need for additional attempts or device change.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of videolaryngoscopes

    Time frame: From the day of surgery until hospital discharge (up to 30 days postoperatively)

    Cost-effectiveness will be assessed using the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER), calculated as the difference in total cost per patient (unit: US dollars) between the BESDATA BD-DF and McGRATH™ MAC devices divided by the difference in effectiveness, defined as the rate of successful first-attempt intubation (unit: percentage). Total costs will include device and consumable expenses and direct hospital costs related to postoperative complications and additional length of stay.

Other outcomes

  1. Number of intubation attempts

    Time frame: During anesthetic induction

    Number of intubation attempts

  2. Cormack-Lehane grade

    Time frame: During anesthetic induction

    Cormack-Lehane grade

  3. Percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score

    Time frame: During anesthetic induction

    Percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score

  4. Intubation-related complications.

    Time frame: During anesthetic induction

    Intubation-related complications, including mechanical trauma and desaturation;

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Vinícius C Quintão, MD, PhD

CONTACT

[email protected]

5511971273950

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Sao Paulo General Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of McGRATH™ MAC and Besdata Videolaryngoscopes in the Orotracheal Intubation of Children: A Non-Inferiority Randomized Clinical Trial

Acronym: PANDA

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2027
Study completion
2027
First posted
Jan 20, 2026
Registry last updated
Mar 20, 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.

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