ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Comparison of McGrath Mac and HugeMed Video Laryngoscopes in Pediatric Patients Under 3 Years Old-A Prospective Randomized Trial.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06484517 (Is HugeMed Video Laryngoscope Superior to McGrath in Pediatric Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Is HugeMed Video Laryngoscope Superior to McGrath in Pediatric Patients
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildren generally face a higher incidence of airway management complications, intubation difficulties, and the risk of failed intubation. Currently, there is sufficient evidence in clinical practice for the use of videolaryngoscopes in pediatric airway management. However, there are a number of standard-blade videolaryngoscopes available for children. In addition, there is no clear recommendation on which videolaryngoscope is superior. The primary objective of this study is to compare the first pass success rate and the Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) scores with Cormack-Lehane (CML) scores obtained through direct and indirect laryngoscopy with HugeMed and McGrath Mac videolaryngoscopes in pediatric patients with an unanticipated, difficult airway. MATERIALS AND
methodsFollowing the Ethics Committee approval and written parental consents, a total of 40 elective surgical patients, aged 3 and under, with ASA 1-3 risk classification, and undergoing general anesthesia, were included in the study. After induction of general anesthesia, the first group of patients (Group McGrath,
resultsThere was no significant difference between groups in demographic data including age, gender, body mass index, ASA, and hemodynamic parameters. A significant improvement was observed in CML and POGO scores using indirect laryngoscopy (
conclusionsVideolaryngoscopes improved laryngeal visualization in children under 3 years old. Compared to HugeMed, in indirect laryngoscopy, the McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope was found to be superior, with better CML and POGO scores. However, number of tracheal intubation attempts, success rate, complication risk, and hemodynamic parameters did not show any significant difference between the groups. Clinical trial registration number was NCT06484517.
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.