ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
A randomized control led study comparing CMAC video laryngoscope and Macintosh laryngoscope for insertion of double lumen tube in patients undergoing elective thoracotomy.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pain management after open thoracotomy 2025: procedure-specific postoperative pain management (PROSPECT) recommendations.Anaesthesia · 2026Pooled it
- Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of MedAn with the Nishikawa Blade and UE Videolaryngoscopes for Left-Sided Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Trial
- Pre-shaping double-lumen endotracheal tubes based on video laryngoscope blade curvature enhances first-attempt intubation success rate in patients undergoing thoracoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Video-Laryngoscopy versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-Lumen Endotracheal Intubation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Video laryngoscopy-guided double-lumen tube insertion: Do we have enough evidence yet?Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
- A Randomised Control Study Comparing C-MAC D-Blade Video Laryngoscope (Hyper Angulated Blade) and Macintosh Laryngoscope for Insertion of a Double-Lumen Tube in Patients Undergoing Elective Thoracotomy.Anesthesia, essays and researchesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsDouble lumen tube (DLT) insertion for isolation of lung during thoracic surgery is challenging and is associated with considerable airway trauma. The advent of video laryngoscopy has revolutionized the management of difficult airway. Use of video laryngoscopy may reduce the time to intubate for DLTs even in patients with normal airway. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 87 ASA 1-3 adults, scheduled to undergo elective thoracotomy, requiring a DLT were randomly allocated to videolaryngoscope (CMAC) arm or Macintosh laryngoscope arm. It was on open label study, and only the patient was blinded. The primary objective of this study was to compare the mean time taken for DLT intubation with CMAC (Mac 3) and Macintosh laryngoscope blade and the secondary objectives included the hemodynamic response to intubation, the level of difficulty using the intubation difficulty scale (IDS), and complications associated with intubation. Data was analysed using the statistical software SPSS (version 18.0).
resultsThe time taken for intubation was not significantly different (42.8 ± 14.8 s for CMAC and 42.5 ± 11.5 s for Macintosh laryngoscope
conclusionMacintosh blade is as good as CMAC (mac 3) blade to facilitate DLT intubation in adult patients with no anticipated airway difficulty, however CMAC was superior as it offers better laryngoscopic view, needed less force, and fewer external laryngeal manipulations.
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.