Abstract
We compared the McGrath® Series 5 videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope for double-lumen tracheal tube placement in patients with a predicted good glottic view on assessment of the airway. An initial laryngoscopy was performed using the Macintosh laryngoscope; 96 patients with Cormack and Lehane grade-1 or -2a views were randomly assigned to undergo intubation using either the McGrath or Macintosh device. Compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the McGrath videolaryngoscope provided more Cormack and Lehane grade-1 views (47 (97.9%) vs 29 (60.4%), p < 0.05), a longer mean (SD) intubation time (39.6 (10.0) s vs 24.4 (7.3) s, p < 0.05) and a higher incidence of double-lumen tube malposition (6 (12.5%) vs 0, p < 0.05). However, in 18 non-randomised patients with Cormack and Lehane grade ≥ 2b on initial laryngoscopy using the Macintosh, the glottic view was improved on intubation with the McGrath videolaryngoscope, with a total success rate of double-lumen tube placement of 94.4% and mean (SD) intubation time of 50.0 (18.6) s. We recommend that in patients with a low airway risk index score requiring intubation with a double-lumen tracheal tube, the Macintosh laryngoscope is used as the first device and the McGrath videolaryngoscope is used only if this provides a poor glottic view.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
