ArticleAnesthesia, essays and researches
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.
Article in Anesthesia, essays and researches. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of a double-lumen endotracheal tube is one of the common anesthetic techniques for operations in the thoracic cavity. However, when compared to a single-lumen tube, placement of a double-lumen tube is technically more difficult as a result of which it takes more time to insert and is associated with more complications such as mucosal injury, hoarseness, and sore throat, even in patients with no anticipated airway difficulty. The CMAC D-blade that is usually used in patients with anticipated airway difficulty, could assist in smooth and quick placement of double-lumen tube (DLT) even in patients with no anticipated airway difficulty. Aim of the Study: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the C-MAC D-blade in reducing the time taken to visualize the glottis and intubate patients with normal airway with a double-lumen tube. Setting and Design: This was a prospective open-label randomized control trial in a tertiary hospital. Materials and Methods: Seventy-three consenting adult patients with physical status classes I and II, as determined by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, scheduled to undergo elective thoracotomy, were randomly allocated to receive either C-MAC D-blade (Group D) or Macintosh blade (Group M). The primary objective was to compare the time taken for visualization of the glottis and intubation. Statistical Analysis Used: Chi-square/Fisher's exact test and Results: Seventy-three patients were randomized (Group D = 36; Group M = 37). Time to visualize the glottic structures (4.56 ± 2.396 s vs. 7.27 ± 4.891 s, Conclusion: C-MAC D-blade videolaryngoscope offers a better glottic view and lesser time to visualize glottis when compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope. However, the time taken to insert the DLT after visualization was longer. We infer that there is no advantage in the routine use of C-MAC D-blade for DLT insertion in patients with no anticipated airway difficulty.
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.