Simulated Difficult Airway: CMAC D Blade or Glidescope?

Background Manual in line axial stabilization (MIAS) technique is recommended for stabilizing the cervical spine suspected injuries, but creates special challenges airway management. The present study compares two different video laryngoscope (VL) namely CMAC D blade (CMAC) and glidescope 4 (GL) intubation patients with a simulated difficult by applying MIAS. Methodology This was hospital based prospective, single blind, randomized comparative pilot study. A total of 60 patients, having no predictors scheduled elective surgery were recruited into 2 equal sized groups on software generated random sequence. Primary outcome Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS), whereas time taken to secure obtain capnographic wave, Cormack Lehane Grade (CL) hemodynamic parameter comprised secondary outcomes. following tests- Fischer’s exact test, Chi-square test Student ‘t’ used analysis. Results GL group had an IDS score zero 46.7% compared 26.7% group, 0-5 found be 50 % while scored 66.6%. statistically insignificant (p=0.18). Time successful 43.70±9.91 54.60±20.47 seconds (p=0.011) respectively. Conclusions VL vital tool management airway. superiority one over other device tested here could not established, although showed slightly better scores insignificant.