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 present randomized clinical trial wants to compare the efficacy and safety of UED-A videolaryngoscope to Glidescope Titanium for routinely tracheal intubation in 60 adults, in terms of successful rate, no. attempts and manoeuvre duration.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| UED-A | Experimental | Tracheal Intubation with UED-A videolaryngoscope |
|
| GLIDESCOPE | Active Comparator | Tracheal Intubation with Glidescope Titanium videolaryngoscope |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UED-A Videolaryngoscopy | Device | Tracheal Intubation with UED-A videolaryngoscope |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Tracheal intubation rate | Successful tracheal intubation rate | 30 minutes |
| Number of attempts | Number of attempts for a successful tracheal intubation | 30 minutes |
| Total time of intubation | Time needed to perform a tracheal intubation from the insertion of the video laryngoscope into the patient mouth | 15 minutes |
| Time to glottis visualization | Time needed to visualize the glottis from the insertion of the video laryngoscope into the patient mouth | 15 minutes |
| Cormack-Lehane grade | Cormack-Lehane grade observed at videolaryngoscopy Grade 1: Full view of glottis Grade 2: Partial view of glottis Grade 3: Only epiglottis seen, none of glottis seen Grade 4: Neither glottis nor epiglottis seen | 15 minutes |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Rate of External laryngeal pressure | Rate of external laryngeal pressure during laryngoscopy | 15 minutes |
| Rate of of post-laryngoscopy side effects | Rate of of post-laryngoscopy side effects (bleeding, postoperative sore throat and/or dysphonia) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Campus Bio-medico University Hospital Foundation | Rome | Italy |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24861718 | Background | Agro FE, Doyle DJ, Vennari M. Use of GlideScope(R) in adults: an overview. Minerva Anestesiol. 2015 Mar;81(3):342-51. Epub 2014 May 27. | |
| 34105065 | Background | Law JA, Duggan LV, Asselin M, Baker P, Crosby E, Downey A, Hung OR, Kovacs G, Lemay F, Noppens R, Parotto M, Preston R, Sowers N, Sparrow K, Turkstra TP, Wong DT, Jones PM; Canadian Airway Focus Group. Canadian Airway Focus Group updated consensus-based recommendations for management of the difficult airway: part 2. Planning and implementing safe management of the patient with an anticipated difficult airway. Can J Anaesth. 2021 Sep;68(9):1405-1436. doi: 10.1007/s12630-021-02008-z. Epub 2021 Jun 8. |
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
| Glidescope Videolaryngoscopy |
| Device |
Tracheal Intubation with Glidescope Titanium videolaryngoscope |
|
| 24 hours |
| Rate of Desaturation | Rate of Desaturation (spO2 < 93%) during tracheal intubation attempts | 15 minutes |
| Satisfaction Scale | Clinicians Satisfaction with the use of the videolaryngoscope, expressed by a 0-10 numeric rating scale (0 = the worst videolaryngoscopy ever performed; 10 = the best videolaryngoscopy ever performed) | 30 minutes |
| 21150569 | Background | Aziz MF, Healy D, Kheterpal S, Fu RF, Dillman D, Brambrink AM. Routine clinical practice effectiveness of the Glidescope in difficult airway management: an analysis of 2,004 Glidescope intubations, complications, and failures from two institutions. Anesthesiology. 2011 Jan;114(1):34-41. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182023eb7. |
| 27317711 | Background | Aziz MF, Bayman EO, Van Tienderen MM, Todd MM; StAGE Investigator Group; Brambrink AM. Predictors of difficult videolaryngoscopy with GlideScope(R) or C-MAC(R) with D-blade: secondary analysis from a large comparative videolaryngoscopy trial. Br J Anaesth. 2016 Jul;117(1):118-23. doi: 10.1093/bja/aew128. |
| 27103030 | Background | Al-Ghamdi AA, El Tahan MR, Khidr AM. Comparison of the Macintosh, GlideScope(R), Airtraq(R), and King Vision laryngoscopes in routine airway management. Minerva Anestesiol. 2016 Dec;82(12):1278-1287. Epub 2016 Apr 22. |
| 33260374 | Background | Brozek T, Bruthans J, Porizka M, Blaha J, Ulrichova J, Michalek P. A Randomized Comparison of Non-Channeled GlidescopeTM Titanium Versus Channeled KingVisionTM Videolaryngoscope for Orotracheal Intubation in Obese Patients with BMI > 35 kg.m-2. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020 Nov 29;10(12):1024. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10121024. |
| 32815101 | Background | Turkstra TP, Turkstra DC, Pavlosky AW, Jones PM. Simultaneous en bloc endotracheal tube insertion with GlideScope(R) Titanium video laryngoscope use: a randomized-controlled trial. Can J Anaesth. 2020 Nov;67(11):1515-1523. doi: 10.1007/s12630-020-01778-2. Epub 2020 Aug 19. |
| 41535320 | Derived | Migliorelli S, Strumia A, Costa F, Puricelli G, Ruggiero A, Schiavoni L, Mattei A, Carassiti M, Cataldo R, Agro FE, Pascarella G. Hyper-angulated (Glidescope) versus intermediate-angled (UED-A) videolaryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation in adults: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2026 Jan 14;16(1):1986. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-30932-3. |