Is HugeMed Video Laryngoscope Superior to McGrath in Pediatric Patients

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Difficult Intubation
• Interventions: Device: Hugemed Videolaryngoscope

• Registration Number: NCT06484517
• Lead Sponsor: Marmara University

Brief Summary

Videolaryngoscopes improve laryngeal visualization in children under 3 years. In this study we aimed to compare Hugemed and McGrath videolaryngoscopes regarding their Cormach-Lehane (CL) and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scores. Furthermore, tracheal intubation success rates, need for cricoid pressure and optimization maneuvers, and hemodynamic changes are compared.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2022-03-01
• Primary Completion: 2022-10-01
• Study Completion: 2023-01-31
• Study First Submitted: 2024-06-16
• Status Verified: 2024-07
• Study First Submitted QC: 2024-07-01
• Study First Posted: 2024-07-03
• Last Update Submitted: 2025-01-17
• Last Update Posted: 2025-01-20

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 40

Inclusion Criteria

total of 40 elective surgical patients under the age of 3, classified as ASA 1-3 risk group, who underwent general anesthesia with no anticipated difficult airway.

Exclusion Criteria

Patients who could not obtain parental consent, those classified as ASA 4 and above, individuals with serious cardiac and respiratory problems, and patients anticipated to have a difficult airway were not included in the study.

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
For the group (Group H, n=20), the Hugemed videolaryngoscope was used.	Hugemed Videolaryngoscope	Patients were intubated using one of the appropriate blades numbered 1, 2, or 3 based on their height, weight, and age. After the induction of general anesthesia, patients underwent direct and indirect laryngoscopy with videolaryngoscopes. The Modified Cormack-Lehane score and Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score were recorded, and orotracheal intubation was performed. Number of attempts, need for cricoid pressure, optimization maneuvers, success rate, and hemodynamic parameters of both groups were recorded.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Success of intubation	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	Number of attempts of the intubation.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Percentage of glottis opening (POGO)	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	The primary aim of this study was to compare the percentage of glottis opening (POGO, 0-100%) scores in direct and indirect laryngoscopy performed with HugeMed and McGrath video laryngoscopes in pediatric patients.
Need for optimization maneuvers	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	Whether there are any optimization maneuvers by an assistant.
Degree of hemodynamic changes	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	Whether there are any acute changes in the patient heart rate during the intubation.
blood pressure	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	Whether there are any acute changes in the patient blood pressure during the intubation.
Success of intubation	Procedure (At the time of the intubation of the patient.)	Number of attempts of the intubation.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Marmara University Pendik Research and Training Hospital; 🇹🇷 Istanbul, Turkey