Affiliation:
1. Community Health Centre, Thalisain, Uttarakhand, India
2. Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, Government Medical College, Haldwani, Nainital, Uttarakhand, India
3. Department of Physiology, Government Medical College, Haldwani, Nainital, Uttarakhand, India
Abstract
Abstract
Background:
In the dynamic medical landscape, anesthesiology plays a pivotal role in ensuring patient safety and comfort during surgeries. Central to this is endotracheal intubation, a critical procedure for securing the airway under anesthesia. Innovations such as King Vision and Airtraq video laryngoscopes offer enhanced glottis visualization and Cormack Lehane scores compared to direct laryngoscopy, with a shorter learning curve. This study aims to assess King Vision and Airtraq’s efficiency in terms of laryngoscopy time, Cormack and Lehane grading, and single-attempt success rate, the number of intubation attempts and endotracheal intubation duration.
Methodology:
We conducted a study involving 90 patients, aged 20–40 years, undergoing elective surgeries in Departments of General Surgery, ENT, and Gynecology under General Anesthesia. They were divided into two groups, Group K (King Vision) and Group A (Airtraq). Anesthesiologists with at least 40 prior intubations using both devices performed intubations. Preoperative assessments included Alprazolam and Ranitidine, fasting for 8 h, and vital sign monitoring. Anesthesia induction comprised fentanyl, propofol, and succinylcholine, with Macintosh laryngoscopy as a backup. Anesthesia maintenance included nitrous oxide, oxygen, isoflurane, and rocuronium, while parameters were diligently recorded.
Results:
Our results indicate comparable age and gender distributions between Airtraq and King Vision groups, as well as no differences in Mallampati grading. Kings Vision showed significantly faster laryngoscopy and quicker intubation. Most patients required only one intubation attempt in both groups. Cormack and Lehane grading was unaffected by device choice.
Conclusion:
Our study shows that both Airtraq and King Vision perform similarly across patient characteristics, but King Vision offers faster laryngoscopy and intubation times, ideal for urgent airway management.