Comparison of Airtraq Versus MacIntosh Intubation Via Nasal Approach

Not Applicable

• Conditions: Tracheal Intubation
• Interventions: Device: Airtraq; Device: Intubation

• Registration Number: NCT00847184
• Lead Sponsor: Kliniken Essen-Mitte

Brief Summary

Time, success rate, and number of optimising maneuvers for tracheal intubation via the nasal approach are not different when Aitraq technique is used compared to a standard MacIntosh blade.

Detailed Description

One hundred adult patients with an expected easy intubation and 100 patients with an expected difficult intubation are enrolled. Intubations are performed by two experienced fully boarded anesthesiologists. The design of the study is prospective and randomised.

Study Timeline

• Status Verified: 2009-02
• Study Start: 2009-02
• Study First Submitted: 2009-02-11
• Study First Submitted QC: 2009-02-18
• Last Update Submitted: 2009-02-18
• Study First Posted: 2009-02-19
• Last Update Posted: 2009-02-19
• Primary Completion: 2009-11
• Study Completion: 2009-11

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: UNKNOWN
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 200

Inclusion Criteria

• Scheduled for nasal intubation
• Adult

Exclusion Criteria

• Age under 18 years

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
1. Airtraq	Airtraq	Intubation with the use of the Airtraq technique
2. MacIntosh	Intubation	Intubation using the standard MacIntosh blade

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Time for intubation	10 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Success rate for intubation	10 month

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Prof. Dr. Harald Groeben; 🇩🇪 Essen, Germany