Comparison of Intubation Using Video Laryngeal Mask and Video Laryngoscope in Elective Surgical Patients

Samsun University

Status

Not yet enrolling

Conditions

Videolaryngoscopy

Tracheal Intubation

Anaesthesia

Airway Management

Elective Surgeries

Treatments

Procedure: Video Laryngeal Mask Airway (SaCoVLM) Intubation with Bougie

Procedure: Video Laryngoscope Intubation with Bougie

Study type

Observational

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT07057908

GOKAEK 2025/10/1

Details and patient eligibility

About

This study compares two airway devices that are commonly used during elective surgery: the video laryngeal mask airway (VLM) and the video laryngoscope (VLS). Both are part of routine anesthesia practice. Our main focus is to measure how long intubation takes with each device and to see how successful the intubation is. The study does not involve any extra procedures or risks; everything will be carried out as part of normal patient care.

Full description

In this prospective observational study, we will compare two airway devices commonly used during elective surgeries: the video laryngeal mask airway (SaCoVLM) and the video laryngoscope. The study will involve adult patients (18 years and older, ASA physical status I-III) scheduled to undergo surgery under general anesthesia at Samsun University Training and Research Hospital.

Patients will be assigned to one of two groups. In one group, intubation will be performed using a video laryngoscope; in the other group, a video laryngeal mask will be used. In both groups, tracheal intubation will be carried out with the assistance of a bougie after device placement.

The primary outcome of the study will be intubation time, defined as the duration from insertion of the device until successful confirmation of tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes will include ease of insertion, the need for additional maneuvers, and complications such as desaturation, trauma, or failed attempts.

Since both techniques, as well as bougie use, are already part of routine anesthesia practice, no extra interventions or risks will be introduced. The aim of the study is to compare the performance of these two devices under everyday clinical conditions.

Enrollment

176 estimated patients

Sex

All

Ages

18+ years old

Volunteers

No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

Adult patients aged 18 years and older
Patients scheduled for elective surgical procedures
Patients classified as ASA Physical Status I-III
Patients undergoing general anesthesia

Exclusion criteria

Patients younger than 18 years
Patients undergoing emergency surgery
Patients with difficult airway predictors, such as:

Mallampati score ≥ 3

Thyromental distance < 6 cm

Mouth opening < 3 cm

Patients with anatomical abnormalities or surgical history involving the oropharynx, larynx, or airway
Patients with conditions contraindicating head or neck manipulation (e.g., cervical instability, upper airway tumors)

Pregnant patients