A randomised trial to compare Truview PCD, C-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes in paediatric airway management.

AIM

To evaluate and compare the Truview PCD and C-MAC laryngoscopes to the standard Macintosh laryngoscope in paediatric patients.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty ASA I-II patients in the age group of 1-6 years (10-20 kg) scheduled for elective surgery were randomised into three equal groups for laryngoscopy and intubation with either Truview PCD (Group T), C-MAC (Group C) or Macintosh (Group M) laryngoscopes under general anaesthesia. Percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, application of external laryngeal manoeuvre, time to intubation, number of attempts at intubation, failed intubations, episodes of desaturation and trauma caused were recorded and statistically analysed. A p value of <0.05 was taken as significant.

RESULTS

POGO scores were significantly better with Truview PCD as compared with C-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes (94.7 ± 12.9/82 ± 25.0/85.1 ± 17.1; p < 0.01). There were no failed attempts, episodes of desaturation or trauma in any of the patients. The mean intubation time taken was 19.2 s in group T, 12.3 s in group C and 10.7 s in group M, respectively. There is a statistically significant difference among groups (p < 0.01). Eight patients in group T, 21 out of 50 patients in group C and 19 out of 50 patients in group M needed OELM, respectively. There is significant difference among the groups (p < 0.01) CONCLUSION: Using Truview PCD to assist intubation offers excellent view field of glottic opening after OLEM and the mean time taken is less than 20 s. The Truview PCD tool is suitable for paediatric patients.