Endotracheal Intubation with King Vision Video Laryngoscope vs Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope in ICU: A Comparative Evaluation of Performance and Outcomes

Background: Endotracheal intubation to protect airway patency in critically ill patients with the use of videolaryngoscopes has been emerging and their expertise to handle is crucial. Our study focuses on the performance and outcomes of King Vision video laryngoscope (KVVL) in intensive care unit (ICU) compared to Macintosh direct laryngoscope (DL). Materials and methods: This comparative study was conducted by randomizing 143 critically ill patients in ICU into two groups: KVVL and Macintosh DL (n = 73; n = 70). The intubation difficulty was assessed by Mallampati score III or IV, apnea syndrome (obstructive), cervical spine limitation, opening mouth <3 cm, coma, hypoxia, anesthesiologist nontrained (MACOCHA) score. The primary endpoint was the glottic view measured by Cormack-Lehane (CL) grading. The secondary endpoints were a first-pass success, the time required for intubation, airway morbidities, and manipulations required. Results: The KVVL group showed the primary endpoint of significantly improved glottic visualization measured in terms of CL grading compared with the Macintosh DL group (p < 0.001). In the KVVL group, the first pass success rate was higher (95.7%) compared to the Macintosh DL group (81.4%) (p < 0.05). The time required for intubation in the KVVL group (28.77 & PLUSMN; 2.63 seconds) was significantly less compared with Macintosh DL (38.84 & PLUSMN; 2.72 seconds) group (p < 0.001). The airway morbidities observed were similar in both groups (p = 0.5) and the manipulation required for endotracheal intubation was significantly less (p < 0.05) in our KVVL group (16 cases; 23%) compared to the Macintosh DL group (8 cases; 10%). Conclusion: We found that the performance and outcomes of KVVL in intubating critically ill ICU patients were promising when handled by experienced operators who are experts in anesthesiology and airway management.