ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07614529Updated Oct 30, 2026

Hyperangulated vs Standard Videolaryngoscopy vs Direct Laryngoscopy for Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Intubation

An interventional study of C-MAC Hyperangulated D-Blade Videolaryngoscopy and C-MAC Macintosh Blade Videolaryngoscopy in Endobronchial Intubation, Double Lumen Tube Intubation and Thoracic Surgery, sponsored by Trakya University. Recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-30.

Sponsored by Trakya University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jun 2026; still recruiting 4 months later.
Updated Oct 30, 2026Now RecruitingFirst site in Turkey (Türkiye)+2 moreGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
180
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a prospective, randomized, single-center, three-arm, open-label, low-risk medical device clinical study conducted at the Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Trakya University Medical Faculty.

The study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and clinical usability of three laryngoscopy methods for double-lumen endotracheal tube (DLT) intubation in patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation: (i) C-MAC hyperangulated (D-blade) videolaryngoscopy, (ii) C-MAC Macintosh blade videolaryngoscopy, and (iii) direct Macintosh laryngoscopy.

The primary outcome is the total time to successful DLT placement (in seconds), defined as the interval from the end of mask ventilation to fiberoptic bronchoscopic confirmation of correct tube position. Secondary outcomes include glottic visualization quality (POGO score and Cormack-Lehane grade), intubation difficulty (Intubation Difficulty Scale), number of intubation attempts, need for auxiliary maneuvers, intubation-related complications, malposition rate, and postoperative airway symptoms (sore throat, dysphonia) assessed at 1, 6, and 24 hours postoperatively.

Eligible patients are adults (≥18 years), ASA class I-III, scheduled for elective thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation. Patients with anticipated difficult airway, emergency surgery, pregnancy, or prior upper airway surgery are excluded. A total of 180 patients will be enrolled and randomized 1:1:1 into three groups (60 per group) using computer-generated block randomization.

Read the detailed description

Background and Rationale:

Double-lumen endobronchial tubes (DLTs) are the primary airway device for one-lung ventilation (OLV) in intrathoracic surgery. Their use enables lung isolation, which is essential for surgical exposure in procedures such as lobectomy, pneumonectomy, esophagectomy, and thoracoscopic interventions. Despite their widespread use, DLT placement is technically more demanding than standard single-lumen endotracheal intubation due to the tube's larger outer diameter, greater length, increased rigidity, and the presence of a distal bronchial cuff. These structural characteristics make laryngoscopy and tube advancement through the glottis considerably more challenging and are associated with a higher incidence of oropharyngeal, laryngeal, and tracheobronchial trauma compared to standard intubation.

Airway injuries related to DLT placement span a wide spectrum, ranging from minor mucosal lacerations of the lips, tongue, and pharynx to temporary or permanent vocal cord damage. In rare but serious cases, tracheobronchial perforation has been reported, a potentially life-threatening complication. The increased structural difficulty of DLT intubation translates into a higher likelihood of multiple intubation attempts, each of which independently increases the risk of airway trauma, hemodynamic instability due to prolonged laryngoscopy, and desaturation. Minimizing the number of attempts and the total intubation time is therefore of direct clinical importance in this patient population.

Videolaryngoscopy (VL) has become increasingly integrated into routine and difficult airway management over the past two decades. By providing an indirect, magnified view of the glottis transmitted via a camera mounted at the tip of the blade, VL improves glottic visualization compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL), particularly in patients with anticipated or unanticipated difficult airways. Multiple meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the superiority of VL over DL in terms of first-attempt success rate, Cormack-Lehane grade, and rate of esophageal intubation in both routine and difficult airway scenarios.

The Storz C-MAC system is one of the most widely studied videolaryngoscopes and is available in two blade configurations relevant to this study: the Macintosh-geometry blade (C-MAC M-blade), which allows both direct and indirect laryngoscopy and preserves familiar hand mechanics, and the hyperangulated D-blade (C-MAC D-blade), which provides a more acute viewing angle and is specifically designed for cases where standard geometry blades fail to achieve adequate glottic exposure. Both blades transmit a high-resolution image to an external monitor, and the C-MAC system has been shown to improve first-attempt success rates and glottic visualization in a range of clinical settings.

In the context of DLT intubation, the choice of laryngoscope blade is further complicated by the need to shape the DLT stylet to match the blade curvature. A hyperangulated blade requires a correspondingly acute stylet bend, which may facilitate or hinder tube advancement depending on the operator's experience and the patient's anatomy. While several studies have compared videolaryngoscopy systems with direct laryngoscopy for DLT placement - including the GlideScope, C-MAC, and other platforms - the existing literature remains limited in volume and inconsistent in its conclusions. No adequately powered prospective randomized trial has directly compared the C-MAC D-blade, C-MAC M-blade, and standard direct Macintosh laryngoscopy head-to-head for DLT intubation in thoracic surgery patients. The present study is designed to address this gap.

Objectives and Hypotheses:

The primary objective of this study is to compare three laryngoscopy techniques for DLT intubation - (i) C-MAC hyperangulated D-blade videolaryngoscopy (HCMAC), (ii) C-MAC Macintosh blade videolaryngoscopy (MCMAC), and (iii) direct Macintosh laryngoscopy (DL) - with respect to intubation time, glottic visualization quality, procedural difficulty, and intubation-related complications in adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation.

The secondary objective is to provide prospective, randomized clinical evidence to guide the selection of the most appropriate laryngoscopy method for DLT intubation in routine thoracic anesthesia practice and to contribute to standardization of airway management in this surgical context.

Primary hypothesis: Total DLT placement time is shorter with videolaryngoscopy, particularly with the C-MAC hyperangulated D-blade, compared to direct Macintosh laryngoscopy.

Secondary hypotheses: (1) Videolaryngoscopy groups will demonstrate superior glottic visualization as measured by POGO score and Cormack-Lehane grade. (2) Intubation difficulty as assessed by the Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS) and the need for auxiliary maneuvers will be lower in videolaryngoscopy groups. (3) The overall incidence of intubation-related complications, including mucosal trauma, dental or lip injury, and hemodynamic perturbations associated with laryngoscopy, will be lower in videolaryngoscopy groups compared to direct laryngoscopy.

Study Design:

This is a prospective, randomized, single-center, three-arm, open-label, low-risk medical device clinical study. The study is conducted at the Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Trakya University Medical Faculty, Trakya University Health Research and Application Center Hospital, Edirne, Turkey. The study is classified as a low-risk medical device clinical investigation, as all procedures are performed within the scope of routine clinical care and no additional investigational drugs or invasive interventions beyond standard practice are introduced.

Patients fulfilling eligibility criteria are randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three study arms (HCMAC, MCMAC, or DL) using a computer-generated block randomization sequence. Allocation concealment is maintained using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes that are opened in the operating room immediately prior to the intubation attempt.

Eligibility Criteria:

Inclusion criteria: age ≥18 years; written informed consent obtained prior to surgery; ASA physical status class I, II, or III; scheduled for elective thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation and double-lumen endobronchial intubation.

Exclusion criteria: age \<18 years; refusal or inability to provide informed consent; ASA physical status class IV or above; emergency surgery; anticipated difficult airway defined by any of the following - Mallampati score 4, thyromental distance \<6.5 cm, restricted mouth opening, or BMI >30 kg/m²; history of upper airway surgery; significant upper airway obstruction or stridor; pregnancy.

Interventions and Procedures:

All patients receive standard intraoperative monitoring per ASA guidelines, including continuous ECG, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), and non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP). Following induction of general anesthesia, mask ventilation is performed until conditions for intubation are achieved. DLT size is selected according to a validated sex- and height-based sizing scale. The intubation is then performed using the laryngoscopy device assigned by randomization.

Glottic visualization is assessed by the operator immediately upon laryngoscope insertion and recorded as Cormack-Lehane grade and POGO score. Intubation time is defined as the interval from cessation of mask ventilation to fiberoptic bronchoscopic confirmation of correct DLT positioning, and is recorded in seconds. The number of intubation attempts and any auxiliary maneuvers employed - including BURP (backward-upward-rightward pressure), Sellick maneuver, shoulder elevation, 90° or 270° tube rotation during bronchial advancement, and external tracheal pressure - are documented. Where applicable, the number of tube size changes, the sizes attempted, and the size ultimately used for successful placement are recorded.

Correct DLT placement is defined as positioning of the tube in the target bronchus without proximal or distal migration, confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Malposition is classified as: deep bronchial migration, contralateral bronchial placement, or proximal (tracheal) positioning, and is corrected under fiberoptic guidance. If three intubation attempts fail, the institution's established difficult airway management algorithm is activated and the case is classified as intubation failure. All devices used in this study are CE-marked and are used strictly in accordance with their intended purpose as specified by the manufacturer.

Hemodynamic parameters (SpO₂, heart rate, NIBP) are recorded at baseline, immediately before intubation, and at 0, 1, 3, 5, and 10 minutes after intubation. Where available, subglottic diameter and left main bronchial diameter are measured from preoperative CT imaging and recorded. Postoperative assessment includes evaluation for sore throat, dysphagia, and dysphonia at 1, 6, and 24 hours after surgery, as well as documentation of any signs of airway trauma observed intraoperatively or in the postoperative care unit.

Sample Size and Statistical Analysis:

Sample size was estimated based on a power analysis using data from previous reference studies (linked at "references" section). Cohen's effect size f was calculated as 0.235. With 80% statistical power and a two-sided type I error rate of 5%, a minimum of 60 patients per group is required, yielding a total enrollment target of 180 patients across three groups.

Normality of continuous variables will be assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. For normally distributed variables, between-group comparisons will be performed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA); for non-normally distributed variables, the Kruskal-Wallis test will be used. Relationships between categorical variables will be analyzed using chi-square tests. Correlations between continuous variables will be assessed using Pearson or Spearman correlation analysis as appropriate. Continuous variables will be reported as mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range) according to distribution; categorical variables will be reported as frequency and percentage. The threshold for statistical significance is set at p \< 0.05 for all analyses.

02

Conditions studied

  • Endobronchial Intubation
  • Double Lumen Tube Intubation
  • Thoracic Surgery
  • One Lung Ventillation (OLV)

Keywords

  • double-lumen endotracheal tube
  • videolaryngoscopy
  • direct laryngoscopy
  • C-MAC
  • thoracic anesthesia
  • one-lung ventilation
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Trakya University is the lead sponsor of 155 studies on the registry; 15 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18 years or older
  • Written obtained prior to surgery
  • class I, II, or III
  • Scheduled for elective thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation and double-lumen endobronchial intubation

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age under 18 years
  • Refusal or inability to provide
  • class IV or above
  • Emergency surgery
  • Anticipated difficult airway, defined by any of the following: Mallampati score 4, thyromental distance less than 6.5 cm, restricted mouth opening, or greater than 30 kg/m²
  • History of upper airway surgery
  • Significant upper airway obstruction or stridor
  • Pregnancy
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(3)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

ASA physical status

The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.

BMI (body mass index)

Weight in kilograms divided by height in metres squared. Example: 70 kg and 1.75 m gives 70 ÷ (1.75 × 1.75) ≈ 22.9.

What counts as overweight or obesity differs between countries (some use lower cut-offs), so go by the range the study states.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
180 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Hyper-angulated blade C-MAC videolaryngoscopy

    HCMAC: DLT intubation performed using the Storz C-MAC hyperangulated D-blade videolaryngoscope. The D-blade provides an acutely angled geometry and transmits a high-resolution glottic image to an external monitor. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the hyperangulated blade curvature prior to intubation. Glottic view, intubation time, number of attempts, auxiliary maneuvers, and intubation-related complications are recorded. Correct tube placement is confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

    Device: C-MAC Hyperangulated D-Blade Videolaryngoscopy

  • Experimental
    Macintosh-type blade C-MAC videolaryngoscopy

    MCMAC: DLT intubation performed using the Storz C-MAC Macintosh blade videolaryngoscope. The Macintosh geometry blade allows both direct and indirect (video-assisted) laryngoscopy and preserves standard hand mechanics familiar to the operator. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the Macintosh blade curvature prior to intubation. Glottic view, intubation time, number of attempts, auxiliary maneuvers, and intubation-related complications are recorded. Correct tube placement is confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

    Device: C-MAC Macintosh Blade Videolaryngoscopy

  • Active comparator
    Direct laryngoscopy

    DL: DLT intubation performed using a standard direct Macintosh laryngoscope without video assistance. This arm serves as the active comparator representing current standard clinical practice for DLT intubation in thoracic surgery. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the Macintosh blade curvature prior to intubation. Glottic view, intubation time, number of attempts, auxiliary maneuvers, and intubation-related complications are recorded. Correct tube placement is confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy.

    Device: Direct Macintosh Laryngoscopy

Interventions

  • DeviceC-MAC Hyperangulated D-Blade Videolaryngoscopy

    Double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation performed using the Storz C-MAC hyperangulated D-blade videolaryngoscope. The D-blade provides an acutely angled viewing geometry with high-resolution video transmission to an external monitor. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the D-blade curvature prior to intubation. All devices are CE-marked and used in accordance with the manufacturer's intended purpose.

  • DeviceC-MAC Macintosh Blade Videolaryngoscopy

    Double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation performed using the Storz C-MAC Macintosh blade videolaryngoscope. The Macintosh geometry blade enables both direct and video-assisted laryngoscopy while preserving standard hand mechanics. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the Macintosh blade curvature prior to intubation. All devices are CE-marked and used in accordance with the manufacturer's intended purpose.

  • DeviceDirect Macintosh Laryngoscopy

    Double-lumen endotracheal tube intubation performed using a standard direct Macintosh laryngoscope without video assistance. This represents current standard clinical practice for DLT intubation in thoracic surgery and serves as the active comparator. The DLT stylet is shaped to match the Macintosh blade curvature prior to intubation. All devices are CE-marked and used in accordance with the manufacturer's intended purpose.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Total time to successful double-lumen endotracheal tube placement-seconds

    Total intubation time in seconds, defined as the interval from cessation of mask ventilation to the appearance of the first complete end-tidal CO2 waveform confirming successful endotracheal tube placement. Final tube position is verified by fiberoptic bronchoscopy. If the tube is not placed properly, fiberoptic bronchoscopy is used to correct the position. Time is recorded continuously for each participant using a stopwatch. In cases requiring multiple intubation attempts, cumulative time across all attempts is recorded. Cases requiring activation of the difficult airway algorithm after three failed attempts are classified as intubation failure and analyzed separately.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (from cessation of mask ventilation to appearance of the first complete end-tidal CO2 waveform confirming successful DLT placement, assessed immediately after intubation)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Glottic visualization quality - POGO score

    Percentage of Glottic Opening (POGO) score assessed by the operator immediately upon laryngoscope insertion, expressed as a percentage from 0% (no glottic structures visible) to 100% (entire glottic opening visible).

    Time frame: Intraoperative (assessed immediately upon laryngoscope insertion)

  2. Glottic visualization quality - Cormack-Lehane grade

    Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic grade (I, II, III, IV) assessed by the operator immediately upon laryngoscope insertion and recorded as an ordinal variable.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (assessed immediately upon laryngoscope insertion)

  3. Intubation difficulty - Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS)

    Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS) score calculated after each intubation, incorporating number of attempts, number of operators, number of techniques used, Cormack-Lehane grade, lifting force, laryngeal pressure, and vocal cord position. Higher scores indicate greater intubation difficulty.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (assessed immediately after intubation)

  4. Number of intubation attempts

    Total number of intubation attempts required for successful DLT placement, defined as each insertion of the tube past the teeth. Cases requiring more than three attempts are classified as intubation failure and managed according to the institutional difficult airway algorithm.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (recorded during the intubation procedure)

  5. Rate of need for auxiliary maneuvers

    Incidence, type and number of auxiliary maneuvers required during DLT intubation, including BURP (backward-upward-rightward pressure), Sellick maneuver, shoulder elevation, 90° or 270° tube rotation during bronchial advancement, and external tracheal pressure.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (recorded during the intubation procedure)

  6. Rate of intubation-related complications

    Incidence of intraoperative intubation-related complications including mucosal bleeding, dental, lip or tongue trauma, and oxygen desaturation (SpO2 \<92%) during laryngoscopy. Assessed by direct visualization intraoperatively and in the post-anesthesia care unit.

    Time frame: Intraoperative and immediately postoperative (up to 1 hour after surgery)

  7. Rate of DLT malposition confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy

    Incidence and classification of DLT malposition confirmed by fiberoptic bronchoscopy, categorized as deep bronchial migration, contralateral bronchial placement, or proximal (tracheal) positioning. All malpositions are corrected under fiberoptic guidance.

    Time frame: Intraoperative (assessed immediately after intubation by fiberoptic bronchoscopy)

  8. Postoperative sore throat assessed by a Numerical Analog Scale

    Severity of postoperative sore throat assessed using a Numerical Analog Scale (NAS) at 1, 6, and 24 hours after surgery.

    Time frame: Postoperative 1, 6, and 24 hours

  9. Postoperative dysphonia and cough assessed by a 4-point scale (0-3=

    Presence and severity of voice change (dysphonia) and cough assessed at 1, 6, and 24 hours after surgery 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe

    Time frame: Postoperative 1, 6, and 24 hours

  10. Rate of dental and oral mucosal injury detected post-operatively

    Presence of dental injury and oral mucosal injury assessed at 1, 6, and 24 hours after surgery, recorded as present or absent by direct clinical evaluation.

    Time frame: Postoperative 1, 6, and 24 hours

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedDate before it movedWhere the date was before it moved

Started Jun 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Nov 2028, 29 months after the start.

Start moved once since we started tracking on Sep 25, 2026: May 2026 → Jun 2026, on Oct 30, 2026.

Earlier changes are on the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
May 11, 2026
First posted
May 29, 2026
StartActual
Jun 15, 2026was May 2026
Primary completionEst.
Nov 15, 2028
CompletionEst.
Jan 15, 2029
Last update
Oct 30, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Status
Not yet recruiting→Recruiting
changed Oct 30, 2026
Sites
1 site added — first site in Turkey (Türkiye)
Show site
  • Trakya University Hospital · Edirne, Turkey (Türkiye)
Oct 30, 2026
Start date
May 15, 2026→Jun 15, 2026 (actual)
Oct 30, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 30, 2026
    Not yet recruiting→Recruiting
    1 site added — first site in Turkey (Türkiye)
    Show site
    • Trakya University Hospital · Edirne, Turkey (Türkiye)
    Start date May 15, 2026→Jun 15, 2026 (now actual)
    + 1 other change: verification date

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07614529
Lead sponsor
Trakya University
Responsible party
Havva Suheyla AKIN UZAN, MD (Assistant professor, Trakya University) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 29, 2026
Start date
Jun 15, 2026
Primary completion
Nov 15, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 15, 2029 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 30, 2026

Study contacts

havva suheyla akin uzan, medical doctor
Contact
shylaakin@gmail.com
+905079516118

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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