Videolaryngoscopic Intubation Using Macintosh vs.Hyperangulated Blades in Patients With Expected Difficult Intubation

Videolaryngoscopy-guided Intubation Using Macintosh Versus Hyperangulated Blades in Patients With Expected Difficult Intubation Undergoing Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery or Maxillofacial Surgery a Randomized Controlled Trial

Videolaryngoscopy-guided intubation has become widespread as a means of preventing major complications relating to airway management by improving the glottic view, increasing the first attempt success rate, likely reduce rates of hypoxemic events, while reducing the rate of airway trauma. However, as randomized controlled studies in patients with anticipated difficult intubation undergoing ear nose and throat (ENT) or oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgery are lacking, it is still unknown if hyperangulated blades improve glottic view and if their use translates into faster intubation. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the percentage of glottic opening (POGO) between hyperangulated blades and Macintosh blades in patients with expected difficult intubation undergoing ENT or OMF surgery who require transoral tracheal intubation. Secondary aims are to compare secondary outcome measures such as time variables, indicators for difficult and successful intubation, number of attempts, view conditions, difficult airway classifications and adverse events between both blade types.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients requiring general anesthesia with transoral tracheal intubation for elective ear, nose and throat or maxillofacial surgery
• Expected difficult intubation
• Age ≥ 18

Exclusion Criteria:

• Pregnant or breastfeeding woman
• Planned awake tracheal intubation (without deep anesthesia or neuromuscular blocking agents)
• Required transnasal tracheal intubation (e.g. for surgical reasons)
• Special tubes required for surgical reasons ( e.g. double lumen tube)
• Denial of consent