ArticleTurkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation2014
Comparison of the C-MAC D-Blade, Conventional C-MAC, and Macintosh Laryngoscopes in Simulated Easy and Difficult Airways.
Article in Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lateral intubation with the Macintosh laryngoscope and C-MAC D blade videolaryngoscope (LATIN): A randomized controlled trial.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Successfully Anticipated Difficult Airway Management of a "Can Ventilate, but Cannot Intubate" Situation for Urgent Laparoscopic Appendectomy in a Patient with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.Reports (MDPI) · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparison of different types of stylets with no-stylet technique for intubation with C-MAC D-Blade® videolaryngoscope in simulated difficult airway: A prospective randomized study.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2021Article
- Intubation outcomes using the aerosol box during the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective, observational study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- GlideScope versus D-blade for tracheal intubation in cervical spine patients: A randomised controlled trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2019Article
- Comparison of Macintosh, McCoy and C-MAC D-Blade video laryngoscope intubation by prehospital emergency health workers: a simulation study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2017Article
- Comparison of intubation success and glottic visualization using King Vision and C-MAC videolaryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine injuries with cervical immobilization: A randomized clinical trial.Surgical neurology international · 2017Article
- Comparison of the C-MAC video laryngoscope size 2 Macintosh blade with size 2 C-MAC D-Blade for laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation in children with simulated cervical spine injury: A prospective randomized crossover study.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
- A randomized controlled trial comparing C Mac D Blade and Macintosh laryngoscope for nasotracheal intubation in patients undergoing surgeries for head and neck cancer.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRecently, to further enhance the potential in the management of difficult airways, the highly angulated D-Blade was added to the C-MAC system. The purpose of this study was to investigate the laryngoscopic view and intubation parameters using the new C-MAC D-Blade in comparison to the conventional C-MAC video laryngoscope and Macintosh direct laryngoscope in simulated easy and difficult airways.
methodsWe recruited 26 experienced anaesthesia providers into a randomized trial. Each performed tracheal intubation of a Laerdal SimMan(®) manikin with each laryngoscope in the following laryngoscopy scenarios: (1) normal airway, (2) cervical spine immobilization, and (3) tongue edema. The intubation times, success rates, number of intubation attempts, laryngoscopic views, and severity of dental compression were recorded.
resultsIn all scenarios, video laryngoscopes provided better laryngeal exposure than the ML and appeared to produce less dental pressure. In the cervical spine immobilization scenario, D-Blade caused less dental pressure and showed better Cormack-Lehane (CL) classes than the other devices (p<0.001). There were no differences between video laryngoscopes in success of tracheal intubation (p>0.05). The CMAC provided the most rapid intubation. The rate of failure was 19% with ML. In the tongue edema scenario, the CMAC provided the most rapid and successful intubation (p<0.001). There were no differences between video laryngoscopes in laryngoscopic views according to CL classification and dental pressure (p>0.05). The rate of failure was 46% with the ML and 7% with the D-Blade.
conclusionThe CMAC D-Blade caused less dental pressure than the conventional C-MAC and ML in the cervical immobilization scenario. The conventional CMAC performed better than the D-Blade and ML in the tongue edema scenario. These two video laryngoscopes may complement each other in various difficult airway situations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.