Unknown statusInterventionalNot ApplicableLast updated Feb 19, 2009

Comparison of Airtraq Versus MacIntosh Intubation Via Nasal Approach

Comparison of Airtraq vs. MacIntosh Intubation Via Nasal Approach

Overview

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00847184
Lead Sponsor: Kliniken Essen-MitteOTHER
Brief Summary: Time, success rate, and number of optimising maneuvers for tracheal intubation via the nasal approach are not different when Aitraq technique is used compared to a standard MacIntosh blade.
Study Type: Interventional

Status

Study Record Dates

NCT01311284Completed

Comparison Airway Devices in Nasotracheal Intubation in Manikin

NCT03887897Unknown status

First Attempt Intubation Rate With Airtraq vs Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope

NCT03337555Completed

A Comparison of McGrath MAC®, Pentax-AWS® and Macintosh Direct Laryngoscopes for Nasotracheal Intubation

NCT02395432Completed

A Comparison of Tracheal Intubation Using the Totaltrack vs the Macintosh Laryngoscope in Difficult Airway

NCT02395419Unknown status

A Comparison of Tracheal Intubation Using the Totaltrack vs the Airtraq Laryngoscope in Routine Airway Management

NCT02395406Unknown status

A Comparison of Tracheal Intubation Using the Totaltrack vs the Airtraq Laryngoscope in Difficult Airway Management