ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2021
Haemodynamic responses following orotracheal intubation in patients with hypertension---Macintosh direct laryngoscope versus Glidescope®videolaryngoscope.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anesthetic Management of Eosinophilic Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis: A Narrative Review with an Illustrative Case in Cardiac Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Comparison of the Efficacy of Macintosh Laryngoscope Versus Airtraq Videolaryngoscope for Visualization of Laryngeal Structures at the End of Thyroidectomy: A Randomized Control Study.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2023Article
- Intubation characteristics using modified USB videolaryngoscope: A prospective, randomised study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2023Article
- Comparison of self-assembled video laryngoscope versus McGrath MACIndian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Split Type Postman videolaryngoscope: The newer device versus the standard Macintosh laryngoscope in simulated difficult airway - A new hope for difficult intubation scenarios.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Evaluation of the use of the channeled King Vision video laryngoscope in improving glottic visualisation in patients with limited glottic view with the Macintosh laryngoscope: A prospective observational study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2021Article
- Techniques of detecting recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy in patients undergoing thyroid surgery: Pearls and pitfalls.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyReview
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
BACKGROUND AND
aimsGlidescope®videolaryngoscope (GVL) is a video intubation system with 60° angle blade that provides excellent laryngeal view, does not require alignment of oral, pharyngeal, and laryngeal axes for visualisation of glottis, thus causing less stimulation of orolaryngopharynx. The aim of this study was to compare haemodynamic responses (blood pressure and heart rate) and airway morbidity using the Macintosh direct laryngoscope (MDL) and the Glidescope®videolaryngoscope (GVL) in hypertensive patients.
methodsFifty patients with hypertension controlled on antihypertensive medications scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomly assigned to group GVL (
resultsThere was a statistically significant increase in SBP, DBP, and MBP at intubation [(
conclusionIn the hands of an experienced anaesthesiologist, the use of GVL in controlled hypertensive patients is associated with less haemodynamic response as compared to Macintosh Laryngoscope without any increase in airway complications.
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.