Users Online: 2296 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Login 

Year : 2020  |  Volume : 36  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 233-237

Evaluation of King's vision videolaryngoscope and glidescope on hemodynamic stress response to laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation

Department of Anesthesia and Surgical ICU, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Nagat S EL-Shmaa
Department of Anesthesia, Surgical ICU and Pain Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_183_18

Rights and Permissions

Background and Aims: We hypothesis that the use of novel airway devices would decrease hemodynamic stress response (HDSR) to laryngoscopy and endotracheal (ET) intubation. The aim of our study was to evaluate the hemodynamic stress response (HDSR) to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation using the King vision video laryngoscope (KVVL) versus glidescope (GLS). Material and Methods: A prospective randomized, comparative study that was conducted on 80 patients of both sexes; American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II with no anticipated difficult airway, aged 20–60 years; who were scheduled for elective surgical procedure under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups (40 each). Group I: laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were carried out using KVVL, Group II: laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were carried out using GLS. The two groups were compared for noninvasive hemodynamic data such as heart rate and mean arterial pressure. Time to successful intubation and number of attempts were recorded. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded at the preinduction, after induction, at intubation, 1 min, 3 min, 5 min, 10 min, and 15 min. Results: There was significant decrease (P < 0.05) in HR and MBP in both groups just before intubation. In comparison with the baseline, HR and MBP in group I and group II increased but this difference was not significant at 3 min and 5 min after intubation and returned to the baseline at 10 min after intubation and below the baseline at 15 min after intubation. Also, there were no significant differences in the hemodynamic response between the studied groups. Conclusion: Novel airway devices either KVVL or GLS are efficient in reducing HDSR to laryngoscopy and ET intubation.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded138    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal