ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2023
Comparison of C-MAC Miller blade video laryngoscope with conventional Miller blade in infants undergoing elective surgery- A prospective randomised trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for paediatric tracheal intubation: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Video laryngoscopy in neonate and infant intubation-a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Endotracheal intubation (ET) in infants is considered a challenging task over the decades. Infants have short safe apnoea time, and this difficulty has been vanquished to some extent by using the videolaryngoscopes (VLs), but there exists a dearth of research particularly in this vulnerable subset. Therefore, this trial was conducted to evaluate intubation times obtained with C-MAC VL and conventional Miller laryngoscopes in infants. Methods: A total of 80 infants aged between 1 month and 1 year with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II requiring ET were randomised in two groups; the C-MAC VL or Miller laryngoscope ML. Anaesthesia was induced with sevoflurane 1-8% and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV. The primary outcome was evaluated as the total time taken to intubate. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve best glottic view (TBGV), tube insertion time (TIT), percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, number of attempts and intubation difficulty score (IDS). Results: The median (interquartile range) of time taken for ET was less in VL; 22.5 (20.75-26) compared to ML; 26 (21.75-31). TBGV was achieved early in VL group than the ML group (6.03 ± 1.33s/7.88 ± 2.44) respectively (P-value < 0.001). POGO was better in VL (99.12 ± 4.795s) compared to ML (85.50 ± 31.13s). IDS was less in the VL group (0.07 ± 0.27) than in ML (0.70 ± 1.14). Other parameters, such as the number of attempts, bougie usage, adverse effects and TIT, were comparable across the two groups. Conclusion: When compared to the ML group, the C-MAC VL group exhibited a decreased intubation time, early TBGV, better POGO score, reduced IDS and subjective intubation difficulty. As a result, we consider VL to be a more efficacious device for intubating the trachea in infants.
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.