Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The investigators evaluated the usefulness of the Glidescope(GVL) compared with direct laryngoscopy in patients whose airway management are anticipated difficult (C&L grade ≥3) by comparing the laryngoscopic view. Also, the investigators compared the effectiveness of smaller-size blade of GVL (GVLs) with standard blade of GVL selected by patient's weight (GVLw) in the same patients.
We assumed that smaller sized GVL can slide more angulated along the tongue, so the tip of a blade can be placed more anterior and cephalad. The angle of camera would be optimized by inserting the blade further with the blade tip directed toward the larynx. This optimization may be more remarkable with smaller blade because it can be inserted with rotation. Furthermore, the location and the angle of camera are different according to GVL blade size. Considering that patient with difficult airway has hypognathia and more cephalad larynx, it may be helpful with smaller sized GVL (GVLs) rather than GVL selected by weight (GVLw) for improvement of laryngoscopic view in patients with difficult airways. We hypothesized that GVLs can provide better laryngoscopic view than GVLw and DL in patient with difficult airway.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| glottis view assessment | Other | Glottis view assessment using Macintosh laryngoscope & GVL selected by weight & smaller sized GVL in single patient |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macintosh laryngoscope | Device | Glottis view assessment by direct visualization using Macintosh laryngoscope |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The Differences in the Glottis View (C&L Grade) of Macintosh Laryngoscope and GVL Selected by Weight. | Glottis view was scored using C&L grade by Macintosh laryngoscope and GVL selected by weight, and compared each other. We used modified C&L grade: grade 1, all or most of the glottic aperture was visible; grade 2a, posterior cords and cartilage visible; grade 2b, only posterior cartilage visible; grade 3a, epiglottis visible and can be lifted; grade 3b, epiglottis adherent to the posterior pharynx; and grade 4, the epiglottis could not be visualized. For the statistical analysis, the modified C&L grade was converted to an ordinal scale; grade 1 to 1, grade 2a to 2, grade 2b to 3, grade 3a to 4, grade 3b to 5, and grade 4 to 6. Therefore, score range for the data reported in the table was between 1 and 6, with 1 representing best view and 6 representing no view. | up to 1 day of surgery |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The Differences in the Glottis View (C&L Grade) of GVL Selected by Weight and Smaller Sized GVL | Glottis view was scored using C&L grade by GVL selected by weight and smaller sized GVL, and compared each other. Score range for the data reported in the table was between 1 and 6, with 1 representing best view and 6 representing no view. | up to 1day of surgery |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jin-Tae Kim, professor | Seoul National University Hospital | Study Director |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Glottis View Assessment | After checking the C&L grade using Macintosh laryngoscope, C&L grade was re-evaluated using GVL selected by weight and smaller sized GVL in consecutive order. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Macintosh Laryngoscopy for 5 Sec |
| |||||||||||||
| GVL Selected by Weight for 5 Sec |
| |||||||||||||
| Smaller Sized GVL for 5 Sec |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Glottis View Assessment | After checking the C&L grade using Macintosh laryngoscope, C&L grade was re-evaluated using GVL selected by weight and smaller sized GVL in consecutive order. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | The Differences in the Glottis View (C&L Grade) of Macintosh Laryngoscope and GVL Selected by Weight. | Glottis view was scored using C&L grade by Macintosh laryngoscope and GVL selected by weight, and compared each other. We used modified C&L grade: grade 1, all or most of the glottic aperture was visible; grade 2a, posterior cords and cartilage visible; grade 2b, only posterior cartilage visible; grade 3a, epiglottis visible and can be lifted; grade 3b, epiglottis adherent to the posterior pharynx; and grade 4, the epiglottis could not be visualized. For the statistical analysis, the modified C&L grade was converted to an ordinal scale; grade 1 to 1, grade 2a to 2, grade 2b to 3, grade 3a to 4, grade 3b to 5, and grade 4 to 6. Therefore, score range for the data reported in the table was between 1 and 6, with 1 representing best view and 6 representing no view. | Posted | Median | 95% Confidence Interval | units on a scale | up to 1 day of surgery |
|
up go 1 days after surgery
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Macintosh Laryngoscope | C&L grade assessment by Macintosh laryngoscope, after induction of anesthesia |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jin-Tae Kim | Seoul National University Hospital | 82-10-6260-8490 | jintae73@gmail.com |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| GVL selected by weight | Device | Glottis view assessment by GVL selected by weight which is usually selected first |
|
|
| smaller sized GVL | Device | Glottis view assessment by GVL which is smaller in one size than GVL selected by age |
|
|
|
| Participants |
|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
After induction of anesthesia, Macintosh laryngoscope was inserted into mouth and C&L grade was checked.
| OG001 | GVL Selected by Weight | Right after Macintosh laryngoscope was removed, C&L grade was reassessed by second laryngoscopy, using GVL selected by weight. |
|
|
|
| Secondary | The Differences in the Glottis View (C&L Grade) of GVL Selected by Weight and Smaller Sized GVL | Glottis view was scored using C&L grade by GVL selected by weight and smaller sized GVL, and compared each other. Score range for the data reported in the table was between 1 and 6, with 1 representing best view and 6 representing no view. | Four of 23 patients could not be evaluated by smaller sized GVL because there was no smaller blade than their GVL selected by weight. | Posted | Median | 95% Confidence Interval | units on a scale | up to 1day of surgery |
|
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 23 |
| 0 |
| 23 |
| EG001 | GVL Selected by Weight | C&L grade assessment by GVL selected by weight, after removal of Macintosh laryngoscope | 0 | 23 | 0 | 23 |
| EG002 | Smaller Sized GVL | C&L grade assessment by smaller sized GVL, after removal of GVL selected by weight | 0 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
Not provided
Not provided
| No |
| Superiority or Other |