King Vision Videolaryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy in Patients Requiring Endotracheal Intubation for General Anaesthesia: A Comparative Study

ABSTRACT

With new advances in technology, intubation using video laryngoscopy has been gaining popularity, particularlyin patients with difficult airways or as rescue devices in failed intubation attempts. This study was done tocompare the effectiveness of King Vision video laryngoscope (KVL) and Macintosh laryngoscope whenperforming tracheal intubation under general anesthesia Eighty patients requiring endotracheal intubationduring general anaesthesia were randomly assigned into two groups to undergo tracheal intubation usingeither a King Vision video laryngoscope (n=40) or Macintosh laryngoscope (n=40). The primary outcomeswere the time of intubation and Cormack-Lehane grading and secondary outcomes were number of attemptsand optimisation manoeuvres required and complications related to laryngoscopy and intubation. King Visionvideo laryngoscope was found to be significantly better than the Macintosh laryngoscope in terms of Cormackand Lehane grading, requirement of optimisation manoeuvres and need of second attempt for intubationexcept time of intubation which was comparable between the two groups.