Comparison of McGrath® Series 5 video laryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope: A prospective,randomised trial in patients with normal airways

Abstract

Objective: The McGrath Video laryngoscope is a newly developed video laryngoscope that significantly improves laryngeal view and facilitates endotracheal intubation in difficult airways. However in patients with normal airway that is not mentioned before. The aim of this study was to compare the McGrath video laryngoscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with normal airways.

Methods: A total of 100 patients requiring orotracheal intubation, were randomized to either having intubation with the McGrath video laryngoscope or the Macintosh laryngoscope. The primary outcome was the laryngoscopy view using percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score. Secondary outcomes included Cormack and Lehane grading system, time to intubation, number of failed intubations, number of attempts before successful intubation and hemodynamic parameters during intubation.

Results: POGO scores were significantly higher in the McGrath group compared with the Macintosh group (p<0.001) despite time to successful intubation was similar in both groups. The McGrath video laryngoscope provided more Grade-I laryngoscopic views than the Macintosh laryngoscope (p<0.001). Number of more than one attempts in order to achieve success was significantly higher in the Macintosh group (p=0.001). The number of minor complications were significantly higher in the Macintosh group (p=0.004).There were no significant changes in hemodynamic responses between the two groups (p>0.05).

Conclusion: McGrath video laryngoscope allows patients with normal airways to achieve higher POGO scores and significantly more Grade-I laryngoscopic views when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.324.10037

How to cite this:Sargin M, Uluer MS. Comparison of McGrath® Series 5 video laryngoscope with Macintosh laryngoscope: A prospective, randomised trial in patients with normal airways. Pak J Med Sci. 2016;32(4):869-874.   doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.324.10037

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.