A comparative evaluation of Airtraq and Hansraj Video laryngoscopes in patients undergoing tracheal intubation with cervical spine immobilization - A randomized prospective study.

Abstract

Background and Aims:Airway management is a key concern in trauma patients with cervical spine fracture. Application of manual inline axial stabilization (MIAS) has become the standard of care in these patients. Indirect laryngoscopy only requires alignment of the pharyngeal and laryngeal axis. Hence the primary objective of the study was to compare two indirect laryngoscopes, Airtraq (with adaptor) and Hansraj Video laryngoscopes based on its Intubation Difficulty Score.Material and Methods:Sixty anesthetized patients were divided into two groups using computer-based randomization, and tracheal intubation was performed using either Airtraq or Hansraj Videolaryngoscope with cervical spine immobilization.Results:Both Airtraq and Hansraj groups were comparable in terms of percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scoring (92 ± 9.88% vs. 89.3 ± 10.4%.) and duration of intubation attempt (14.9 ± 4.36 sec vs. 16.97 ± 3.64 sec). Intubation difficulty scale (IDS) score was significantly shorter with Airtraq (1 ± 0.58 vs. 1.8 ± 0.805; P < 0.0001). The mean duration of time taken for laryngoscopy in Airtraq (12.9 ± 2.07 s vs. 19.06 ± 3.83 s; P < 0.0001)) was significantly shorter and also the duration of time taken to secure airway in Airtraq VL was significantly shorter (29.47 ± 4.75 s vs. 36.03 ± 5.80 sec; P < 0.0001). The heart rate and MABP changes were modest in both groups, but was significantly more in Hansraj VL as compared to Airtraq VL, post-intubation.Conclusion:Both Airtraq and Hansraj videolaryngoscope can be used as first-hand device in the scenario of cervical spine stabilization. Airtraq videolaryngoscope is better than Hansraj videolaryngoscope due to shorter IDS and lessor hemodynamic changes.