Comparison of KingVision® and C-MAC® Video Laryngoscope for Intubation in Adults: A Prospective Randomised Clinical Study

Background and Aims: Video laryngoscopes are the devices for endotracheal intubation with a video camera or video chip positioned close to the tip of the laryngoscope blade. They have rapidly gained popularity primarily because of the better glottic visualisation compared to direct laryngoscope. The objective of the present study was to compare KingVision ® and C-MAC ® video laryngoscopes with respect to time for successful intubation. Methods: A total of 70 patients aged 20–60 years with ASA grades I and II and Mallampati grades I and II were randomised to be intubated either with KingVision ® (Group K) or C-MAC ® (Group C) video laryngoscope for airway management. The primary outcome was the time required for successful intubation and the secondary outcomes were to assess the number of attempts at tracheal intubation, the proportion of successful intubations, first attempt success rate and the time required to obtain glottic view. Results: Demographic data were comparable between Group K and Group C. Mean time for intubation in Group K was 34.7 ± 7.5 s and for Group C was 28.9 ± 7.5 s ( P = 0.02). C-MAC ® required additional application of laryngeal pressure externally, as compared to KingVision ® for successful intubation ( P = 0.001). Other variables were comparable. Conclusion: C-MAC® required less time for successful intubation and required a greater number of external laryngeal manoeuvres for optimising intubation compared to the KingVision® video laryngoscope.