Comparative Evaluation of C-MAC Videolaryngoscope with Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope in Patients with Normal Airway Predictors.

Background: Video laryngoscopes (VL) assist in securing the airway faster and more accurately in difficult airways. However, data regarding its usefulness in patients with normal airways are sparse.

Aim: We designed this study to compare the ease and success of endotracheal intubation between C-MAC and Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL) in adult patients with no anticipated airway difficulty.

Settings and design: The design involves prospective randomized case - control study.

Subjects and methods: One hundred and twenty adult patients with predicted normal airway were randomized into two groups and were intubated using VL (C-MAC VL) and DL (Macintosh DL), respectively. The Cormack-Lehane (CL) grade, time taken for intubation, attempts taken (number), and need for laryngeal maneuvers or stylets were recorded and analyzed for statistical significance.

Results: Thirty-eight patients in the DL group and 48 patients in the VL group had CL I view, 20 patients in the DL group and 16 patients in the VL group had CL II, and two patients in the DL group had CL III view. None of the patients in Group VL had CL III view. In seven out of 60 cases in the DL group, difficulty was experienced during insertion of the laryngoscope blade as compared to two cases out of 60 in the VL group. The mean time taken for intubation was lesser in Group DL (28.48 s) as compared to 39.3 s in Group VL. Nine patients in Group DL and 16 patients in Group VL required external laryngeal manipulation. Stylets were used, in seven patients in group DL and in 11 patients in group VL.

Conclusions: In patients with a predicted normal airway, C-MAC provides a better glottic view compared to Macintosh DL. Time taken for intubation using the C-MAC video laryngoscope was more. However, success rates on the first attempt at endotracheal intubation and the number of intubation attempts with either laryngoscope were similar.