BMC Anesthesiology (2015), DOI 10.1186/s12871-015-0037-5
Seventy ASA physical status I and II patients with predicted normal airway were scheduled for thoracic surgeries with double-lumen tube intubation. They were randomly assigned to one of two groups and intubated with either the Airtraq laryngoscope (group A, n = 35) or the GlideScope (group G, n = 35).
The mean arterial pressure and heart rate rose to higher levels during intubation with the GlideScope than with the Airtraq laryngoscope. The success of the first intubation attempt and the intubation difficulty scales were comparable between the two groups. The numbers of patients who experienced postoperative sore throat were similar (6 vs. 8) in the two groups.
Conclusions: Compared with the GlideScope, the specially designed Airtraq laryngoscope might be more suitable for double-lumen tube intubations in patients with predicted normal airway.
Journal of Cardiothoracic Anesthesia, 2017
Participants: The study comprised 133 patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery Interventions. Patients were randomly allocated into the following 4 groups of DLTs: Macintosh (n 32), GlideScope (n 34), Airtraq (n 35),or King VL (n 32).
Conclusions: Use of the Airtraq for endobronchial intubation was of clinical importance because it was associated with – a signiﬁcantly shorter time to endobronchial intubation (–63.5%) – a lower intubation difﬁculty score (–54.2%) – and required fewer frequent optimizing maneuvers (–45.3%) than that of the GlideScope.
In addition, when compared with the GlideScope and KVL laryngoscopes, the Airtraq required less time to conﬁrmation of endobronchial intubation (40.4% and 26.9%, respectively). In addition, in the present study, there was no cuff rupture in the Airtraq group.
Request a FREE on-site demonstration from a local Airtraq Sales Representative.