The Comparison of Glidescope® and the Direct Laryngoscopy in the Insertion of the Double Lumen Endotracheal Tube (Glidescope)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01424605|
Recruitment Status : Completed
First Posted : August 29, 2011
Last Update Posted : August 29, 2011
Double-lumen bronchial tube (DLT) had been demonstrated to benefit for thoracic surgery and also played an important role to achieve one-lung ventilation (OLV) for exploring the surgical fields. However, compared with the single-lumen endotracheal tube (SLT), the DLT had larger OD (outer diameter), longer length, and was more complex in its structure. For avoiding oral tissue trauma and shortening the DLT intubating time, thus, an adequate and complete glottic viewing under laryngoscope was needed.
Over the past decade, several video-assisted laryngoscopes had been developed to facilitate the tracheal intubation in the difficult airway. Among these devices, the GlideScope® videolaryngoscope (GVL) (Verathon, Bothell, WA, USA) was a reusable video laryngoscope with a 60° curvature blade. A light source and a digital video camera were installed at the tip of the laryngoscope blade and the pictures of the glottis and the vocal cords were displayed on an LCD monitor. We could insert the endotracheal tube passing the vocal cords into the trachea more precisely and had less tissue damaging under the GVL's guidance.
Compared with direct MacIntosh laryngoscope, the GVL had been reported that it can decrease the intubation time and increase the successful rate of first intubation in normal and difficult airways. However, the efficacy of the GVL in intubating the DLT was unclear and had never been evaluated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the intubation conditions, safety, and patient comfort between using the GVL and the direct Macintosh laryngoscope in a specific population of patients needed DLT intubation. Main outcome measures were intubation success rates and the time needed to intubate the DLT with the two devices.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Anesthesia Intubation Complication||Procedure: DLT intubation||Not Applicable|
Show Detailed Description
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||60 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)|
|Official Title:||The Comparison of Glidescope® and the Direct Laryngoscopy in the Insertion of the Double Lumen Endotracheal Tube|
|Study Start Date :||January 2010|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||December 2010|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||December 2010|
|Experimental: DLT intubation||
Procedure: DLT intubation
Using a video-assisted laryngoscope to facilitate endotracheal tube intubation
Other Name: Intubation with GlideScope
- Main outcome measure is the successful rate of the first intubation compared with the two devices [ Time Frame: 12 month ]
- The outcome measure is the time needed to inert the DLT compared with the two devices [ Time Frame: 12 months ]
- The outcome measure were the hemodynamic parameters (such as mean blood pressure, and heart rate) compared with the two devices. [ Time Frame: 12 months ]
- The outcome measure is the incidence of complications (such as sorethroat, oral bleeding, and hypoxemia) compared with the two devices. [ Time Frame: 12 months ]Hypoxemia is defined as the SPO2 is below 90%.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01424605
|department of anesthesia, Kaohsiung medical university memorial hospital|
|Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 807|
|Principal Investigator:||Hung-Te Hsu, MD||Department of anesthesia, Kaoshiung medical university hospital|