CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01556061Updated May 26, 2014Results posted

Comparison of Storz C-MAC and D-MAC Orotracheal Intubation Systems in Morbidly Obese Patients

A Phase 4 interventional study of DMAC and CMAC in Obesity, sponsored by The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2014-05-26.

Sponsored by The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 65 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The investigators hypothesize that the D-MAC (Dblade with C-MAC system) may be a suitable alternative device for difficult laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation in morbidly obese patients. The D-MAC will enable superior view of the glottic structures as well as easier endotracheal intubations than the C-MAC blade. This is the first study to investigate the individual and comparative performances of C-MAC and D-MAC in this patient cohort.

Read the detailed description

Since the introduction of laryngoscopy, blades have undergone design innovations with the goal of improving laryngeal visualization and successful tracheal intubation because difficult intubation may be encountered even in patients with favorable anatomy.

Failed intubation shows occurrence in 0.05% of surgical patients and in 0.13% to 0.35% of obstetric and obese patients and the incidence of unsuspected difficult intubation is estimated to be higher at approximately 3%, with poor airway visualization being a major contributing factor.

Moreover airway management in the obese patient population requires special consideration. An increased BMI is associated with reduced posterior airway space and improper mask ventilation, both of which may lead to rapid development of hypoxemia and possible desaturation immediately after anesthetic induction.

As the prevalence of obesity has increased from 23% in 1992 to 33.8% in 2008 and an estimated 140,000 surgical bariatric cases are performed in the U.S., anesthesiologists face challenges of airway management in this population.

The main advantage of video intubation is provision of superior views compared to traditional laryngoscopy.

This study is designed to determine preliminarily the efficacy of the the D-BLADE [D-MAC] intubation systems compared to C-MAC in the bariatric population. The hypothesis is that D-MAC will enable superior view of the glottic structures as well as easier endotracheal intubations than the C-MAC blade.

A. General Study Design- The study will include a total of 50 morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥ 40kg/m2) scheduled for elective surgery (bariatric, gynecological, urological, general abdominal and otorhinolaryngology) at Memorial Hermann Hospital.

All patients will be intubated using conventional endotracheal tubes and preferably without any alternative aid to intubation. Patient will be followed for the time they will spend in the operating block (from the airway assessment time to the time of PACU discharge).

In the operating room, ASA standard monitoring devices will be applied: a pulse oximeter, a 3 lead ECG, and a blood pressure cuff (or invasive blood pressure depending on the patients' conditions). Pre-induction baseline measurements of blood pressure, heart rate, percent oxygen saturation and end tidal CO2 will be made. Patients will be positioned in a head elevated position (RAMP or TROOP pillow) and pre-oxygenated for 5 minutes. One set of pre-insertion vital signs (after induction) will be obtained. From the time anesthetic induction is begun until five minutes after the patient has been successfully intubated, five sets of vital signs will be recorded at one minute intervals. General anesthesia will be induced by bolus administration of propofol (2-3 mg/kg), fentanyl (2 mcg/kg), and succinylcholine (1mg/kg) per ideal body weight (assuming an ideal BMI of 32 kg/m2 up to a BMI of 50 kg/m2 and an ideal BMI 35 kg/m2 over 50 kg/m2. A rapid sequence induction (RSI) will be performed. RSI will be achieved with suxamethonium.The lungs will be mechanically ventilated with a semi-closed circle system to maintain an end-tidal CO2 near 35 mmHg. Patients' lungs will be ventilated via face-mask for 3 minutes with 100% oxygen until the patient is completely relaxed.

A ll investigators (residents and attending) will be trained based on manufacturer recommendations, and each resident will perform at least 3 intubations with the C-MAC and D-MAC video laryngoscope prior to enlisting any patients for the study. Intubations will be performed by 2nd and 3rd year (CA-2 and CA-3) residents. Size 3 blades of CMAC will be utilized in all cases (a size 4 will be available if necessary).

A computer-generated list will randomize the order of C-MAC and D-MAC to prevent bias. The resident will use either the C-MAC first followed by the D-MAC, or viceversa, and will declare the Cormack-Lehane Scale score for each method. Intubation will be attempted after the second laryngoscopy technique being used. External neck pressure may be applied by an assistant to improve laryngeal exposure. Any external manipulation will be recorded, and the optimal view obtained and the time required to obtain it for each method will be recorded.

The resident will have only one attempt each for C-MAC and D-MAC laryngoscopy. If the first attempt is unsuccessful, the attending anesthesiologist will take one more attempt for that particular method, C-MAC or D-MAC. The number of attempts (maximum 4 total as defined by reinsertion of either the blade or endotracheal tube), time required to obtain optimum view, CL score of view, and time required to intubate will all be recorded. Intubation time is defined by time from which the anesthesiologist has ETT in hand to when the ETT cuff passes distally through vocal cords. If unsuccessful, the direct laryngoscopy/flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy will be performed to intubate the trachea. If more than 4 attempts are needed, or if the anesthesiologist discontinues use of the video laryngoscope, the case will be considered a failure. The resident's subjective opinion on laryngoscopy and intubation difficulty level (from 1 = Extremely Easy, to 5 = Extremely Difficult) will also be recorded.

In order to maintain patient safety all intubation attempts will be performed within the safety apnea time or time for oxygen blood saturation to drop to 92%.

B. Measurements Pre-operatively, morphometric characteristics of all patients will be recorded: Mallampati score, adequacy of neck mobility, neck circumference, thyromental distance, sternomental distance, and interincisor gap distance.

Degree of irritation: Following intubation in either group, the appearance of oropharynx, pharynx, epiglottis, and arytenoids will be checked. The presence of abrasions, bleeding, redness, perforation or other signs of tissue or dental injury will be recorded. Also, the patient's subjective report of soreness, hoarseness, or dysphagia post-operatively will be recorded as well.

DATA ANALYSIS:

This investigation will serve as preliminary study to determine if there is an improved rate of airway view during C-MAC or D-MAC video laryngoscopy. The study will have a time frame of 12 months. Data will be summarized using mean ± SD, median and interquantile, and frequency (%) for discrete variables by each group. Appropriate tests like t-test, ANOVA, chi-squared, and Fischer tests will be used to compare the mean primary outcome variable, duration of desaturation, between two groups after adjusting the effects of risk factors.

For the secondary outcome variables, appropriate tests like t-test, ANOVA, or the chi-squared tests will be performed to compare the continuous variables between two groups to compare the percentage of discrete outcome variables between two groups.

Statistical analyses will be conducted using STATA 10.0 College Station, TX and a p-value \< 0.05 will be considered as statistical significant.

02

Conditions studied

  • Obesity

Keywords

  • Laryngoscopy
  • Airway Management
  • Intubation
03

In context

Lead sponsor

The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston is the lead sponsor of 880 studies on the registry; 209 are open to participants now.

Of its 170 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 140 (82%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 65 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18-65 years
  • ASA I-III
  • BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Necessary awake intubation
  • Mallampati IV
  • \< 2 finger breath or 4 cm mouth opening
  • Previous history of difficult intubation
  • ASA IV-V
  • Unstable cervical, thoracic and/or lumbar fracture
  • Known history of congestive heart failure or a severe disease that alters pulmonary mechanics (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, restrictive lung diseases)
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
50 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    D-MAC video laryngoscopy

    The Dblade is used to perfom laryngoscopy first but second laryngoscopy and intubation is performed with CMAC blade.

    Device: DMAC · Device: CMAC

  • Active comparator
    C-MAC video laryngoscopy

    The CMAC blade is used to perfom laryngoscopy first but second laryngoscopy and intubation is performed with D-blade

    Device: DMAC · Device: CMAC

Interventions

  • DeviceDMAC

    The D blade will constitute the experimental treatment and in a cross over fashion will be tested against CMAC blade

    Also known as: D-Blade CMAC system

  • DeviceCMAC

    The CMAC Blade will constitute the active comparator treatment and in a cross over fashion will be tested against D-blade

    Also known as: CMAC blade

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Time for Intubation

    Time taken for successful placement of endotracheal tube after a successful laryngoscopy. Typically a successful laryngoscopy will range from few seconds to no more than 90 seconds. A successful intubation will not range more than 90 seconds.

    Time frame: 90 seconds

Secondary outcomes

  1. First Laryngoscopy

    Patients underwent laryngoscopy first with their assigned randomized laryngoscope. Time measured was from the time from the moment the anesthesiologist had the laryngoscope in hand to time to optimal visualization of vocal cords.

    Time frame: 30 seconds

  2. Second Laryngoscopy

    A second laryngoscopy will be performed in patients with the video laryngoscope from the other group. Patients will be intubated after second laryngoscopy with with this same video laryngoscope.

    Time frame: 30 seconds

07

Results

Posted May 26, 2014

Participant flow

The dates of the recruitment period were 6/1/11 -12/12/11. Patients were recruited in the Preoperative Day Surgery area and preoperative Holding Unit.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneC-MAC First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC First, Then CMAC Video Laryngoscopy
Started2525
Completed2525
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryTime for Intubation

Time taken for successful placement of endotracheal tube after a successful laryngoscopy. Typically a successful laryngoscopy will range from few seconds to no more than 90 seconds. A successful intubation will not range more than 90 seconds.

Time frame:
90 seconds
Reported as:
Median · seconds
Time for Intubation
secondsC-MAC Laryngoscopy First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC Laryngoscopy First, Then C-MAC Video Laryngoscopy
Time for Intubation9 (5.85 to 13.95)7.3 (5.35 to 13.45)
SecondaryFirst Laryngoscopy

Patients underwent laryngoscopy first with their assigned randomized laryngoscope. Time measured was from the time from the moment the anesthesiologist had the laryngoscope in hand to time to optimal visualization of vocal cords.

Time frame:
30 seconds
Reported as:
Median · seconds
First Laryngoscopy
secondsC-MAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC Video Laryngoscopy
First Laryngoscopy6.7 (4.45 to 9.7)7.2 (4.82 to 9.95)
SecondarySecond Laryngoscopy

A second laryngoscopy will be performed in patients with the video laryngoscope from the other group. Patients will be intubated after second laryngoscopy with with this same video laryngoscope.

Time frame:
30 seconds
Reported as:
Median · seconds
Second Laryngoscopy
secondsC-MAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC Video Laryngoscopy
Second Laryngoscopy6.7 (4.2 to 9.1)5.5 (4.04 to 9.4)

Adverse events

Non-serious events are listed at a 2% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
C-MAC Laryngoscopy First, Then DMAC Video Laryngoscopy—0/25 (0%)0/25 (0%)
DMAC Laryngoscopy First, Then C-MAC Video Laryngoscopy—0/25 (0%)0/25 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)C-MAC First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC First, Then C-MAC Video LaryngoscopyTotal
<=18 years000
Between 18 and 65 years252550
>=65 years000
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)C-MAC First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC First, Then C-MAC Video LaryngoscopyTotal
Mean42.4 ± 11.046.2 ± 11.244.3 ± 11.1
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)C-MAC First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC First, Then C-MAC Video LaryngoscopyTotal
Female212142
Male448
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)C-MAC First, Then DMAC Video LaryngoscopyD-MAC First, Then C-MAC Video LaryngoscopyTotal
United States252550
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Memorial Hermann Hospital-TMC
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 26, 2014, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01556061
Lead sponsor
The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston
Responsible party
Davide Cattano (Associate Professor, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 16, 2012
Start date
Jun 2011
Primary completion
Dec 2011
Completion
Dec 2011
Results posted
May 26, 2014
Last update
May 26, 2014

Study contacts

Davide Cattano, MD, PhD
principal investigator · University Of Texas at Houston Medical School

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2014. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion