What side effects are associated with this type of intervention?

The most common treatments for laryngoscopy, including video laryngoscopy, generally involve the use of anesthetics and visualization tools. Known side effects of these treatments can include sore throat, hoarseness, and minor bleeding. In some cases, more serious complications such as airway trauma, infection, or adverse reactions to anesthetics may occur. Video laryngoscopy, which enhances visualization of the airway, may reduce the risk of airway trauma compared to conventional direct laryngoscopy, but it still carries similar risks associated with the procedure.

What prior FDA approvals exist?

The FDA has approved various video laryngoscopes that enhance visualization of the airway, improving intubation success rates compared to conventional direct laryngoscopy. These devices, such as the GlideScope, C-MAC, and McGrath video laryngoscopes, provide a clearer view of the vocal cords and surrounding structures, facilitating more accurate and efficient intubation. While the focus is primarily on the devices themselves, adjunctive medications like topical anesthetics and sedatives are often used to improve patient comfort and procedure success.

What other types of research exist?

Promising novel alternatives to video laryngoscopy for laryngoscopy patients in 2024 include ultrasound-guided intubation and robotic-assisted intubation. These methods aim to improve intubation success rates and reduce airway trauma.

← Back to Search

Videolaryngoscopy vs. Direct Laryngoscopy for Intubation

N/A

Waitlist Available

Led By Kurt Ruetzler, MD

Research Sponsored by The Cleveland Clinic

Eligibility Criteria Checklist

Specific guidelines that determine who can or cannot participate in a clinical trial

Must have

Be older than 18 years old

Timeline

Screening 3 weeks

Treatment Varies

Follow Up from the start time of intubation to time of the end of surgery up to 45 minutes

Awards & highlights

Study Summary

This trial will compare how successful intubation is when performed with a video laryngoscope vs. a conventional direct laryngoscope, in terms of both number of intubation attempts and airway trauma.

Who is the study for?

This trial is for patients who need a tube placed in their windpipe through the mouth for general anesthesia during elective or emergency surgery. It's not suitable for cases where the anesthesiologist recommends a specific method, or when awake fiberoptic intubation or double-lumen tubes are needed.Check my eligibility

What is being tested?

The study compares two ways to place a breathing tube: using a GlideScope videolaryngoscope (a device with a camera) versus the traditional direct laryngoscopy without video assistance. The goal is to see which method has higher success on the first try and causes less injury.See study design

What are the potential side effects?

Potential side effects may include sore throat, difficulty swallowing, hoarseness, and minor oral or airway injuries. These can result from either technique used in placing the breathing tube.

Timeline

Screening ~ 3 weeks3 visits

Treatment ~ Varies

Follow Up ~ from the start time of intubation to time of the end of surgery up to 45 minutes

Screening ~ 3 weeks

Treatment ~ Varies

Follow Up ~from the start time of intubation to time of the end of surgery up to 45 minutes

This trial's timeline: 3 weeks for screening, Varies for treatment, and from the start time of intubation to time of the end of surgery up to 45 minutes for reporting.

Treatment Details

Study Objectives

Outcome measures can provide a clearer picture of what you can expect from a treatment.

Primary outcome measures

The number of intubation attempts with the initial laryngoscopy instrument.

Secondary outcome measures

Any dental or airway injury

Intubation failure

Trial Design

2Treatment groups

Experimental Treatment

Active Control

Group I: videolaryngoscopyExperimental Treatment1 Intervention

Initial intubation performed using GlideScope videolaryngoscope.

Group II: conventional direct laryngoscopyActive Control1 Intervention

Initial intubation performed using direct laryngoscopy.

Treatment

First Studied

Drug Approval Stage

How many patients have taken this drug

GlideScope videolaryngoscope (Verathon, Bothell, WA 98011)

2021

N/A

~12710

Do I qualify?Apply below to find out

Research Highlights

Information in this section is not a recommendation. We encourage patients to speak with their healthcare team when evaluating any treatment decision.

Mechanism Of Action

Side Effect Profile

Prior Approvals

Other Research

Video laryngoscopy enhances the visualization of the airway by using a camera and a video screen, which allows for a clearer and more detailed view compared to conventional direct laryngoscopy. This improved visualization can lead to higher success rates in intubation, fewer attempts needed, and reduced airway trauma. For patients, this means a potentially safer procedure with fewer complications and a higher likelihood of successful intubation on the first attempt, which is crucial in emergency and surgical settings.

Airway evaluation in obstructive sleep apnea.

Find a Location

Who is running the clinical trial?

The Cleveland ClinicLead Sponsor

1,034 Previous Clinical Trials

1,352,724 Total Patients Enrolled

Kurt Ruetzler, MDPrincipal InvestigatorThe Cleveland Clinic

4 Previous Clinical Trials

1,209 Total Patients Enrolled

Media Library

Direct laryngoscopy Clinical Trial Eligibility Overview. Trial Name: NCT04701762 — N/A

Laryngoscopy Research Study Groups: videolaryngoscopy, conventional direct laryngoscopy

Laryngoscopy Clinical Trial 2023: Direct laryngoscopy Highlights & Side Effects. Trial Name: NCT04701762 — N/A

Direct laryngoscopy 2023 Treatment Timeline for Medical Study. Trial Name: NCT04701762 — N/A

~2988 spots leftby Jun 2025

Unbiased ResultsWe believe in providing patients with all the options.

Your Data Stays Your DataWe only share your information with the clinical trials you're trying to access.

Verified Trials OnlyAll of our trials are run by licensed doctors, researchers, and healthcare companies.