King Vision vs Macintosh Laryngoscopy for Intubation Time in Novice Users

Comparison of the King Vision Channeled Videolaryngoscope and Conventional Laryngoscopy for Endotracheal Intubation Time in Novice Users: A Prospective, Randomised Controlled Trial

This study evaluated two different devices used for placing a breathing tube (endotracheal intubation) in adult patients undergoing elective surgery. The aim was to compare the King Vision videolaryngoscope, which has a camera and a guiding channel for the tube, with the traditional Macintosh laryngoscope, which allows doctors to look directly at the vocal cords. The study focused on how long it takes to successfully insert the tube, the need for additional maneuvers during the procedure, and the overall success rate of first attempts. The procedures were performed by novice operators under supervision.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Adult patients (≥18 years old) scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia requiring orotracheal intubation
• American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-II
• Mallampati airway classification I-II
• Written informed consent obtained from the patient

Exclusion Criteria:

• Predicted or known difficult airway: Mallampati III-IV, inter-incisor distance <2.5 cm, thyromental distance <6 cm, limited cervical spine mobility
• History of difficult intubation or need for awake/rapid-sequence intubation
• Upper airway pathology (tumour, trauma, infection), limited mouth opening, or craniofacial anomalies
• Emergency surgery, high aspiration risk, or full stomach
• Severe cardiopulmonary instability (e.g., shock, severe hypoxaemia)
• Pregnancy or breastfeeding
• BMI >35 kg/m² (if your protocol excludes obesity; remove if not applicable)
• Participation refusal or inability to consent