Airway ManagementVivaOPNCT04501692
VivaSight-SL Versus Videolaryngoscopy in Expected Difficult Airway
A study testing VivaSight and Videolaryngoscopy in people with Airway Management, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
Patients requiring endotracheal intubation for elective surgery with an expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) videolaryngoscopy or b) an endotracheal tube-mounted camera. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Airway Management
- What is being tested?
- VivaSight and Videolaryngoscopy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 48 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- 27 Aug 2020to 12 Feb 2021
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients requiring general anesthesia with transoral tracheal intubation for elective surgery
- Age ≥ 18
- Preoperative airway assessment reveals an expected difficult airway (rated by the responsible anesthetist in the Pre-assessment Clinic based on the existing in-house algorithm)
Who cannot join
- Pregnant or breastfeeding woman
- Confirmed indications for awake fiberoptic intubation especially due to enoral, pharyngeal tumors, abscesses or other processes
- Planned endotracheal intubation without deep anesthesia or neuromuscular blocking agents (e.g. awake videolaryngoscopy)
- Required transnasal tracheal intubation (e.g. for surgical reasons)
- Requirement of special endotracheal tubes such as laser or RAE tubes for surgical reasons
- Patients at risk for pulmonary aspiration who qualify for rapid sequence induction
- Loose teeth
- Denial of consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Germany1 site
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
Hamburg, Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, 20246
About this study
Official title: Endotracheal Tube-mounted Camera Assisted Intubation Versus Videolaryngoscopic Intubation in Patients With Expected Difficult Airway - a Prospective Randomized Trial
Patients requiring endotracheal intubation for elective surgery with an expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) videolaryngoscopy or b) an endotracheal tube-mounted camera.
Read the detailed description
Endotracheal intubation is required for different surgical procedures for mechanical ventilation and to prevent aspiration of secretions. Endotracheal intubation is usually performed by direct laryngoscopy (DL), but this technique may fail in patients with a difficult airway, i.e. during otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery. Besides fiberoptic intubation that is regarded as gold standard, videolaryngoscopy (VL) has evolved as a valuable alternative technique in patients with a difficult airway. However, VL has its limitations and may also fail due to insufficient visualization of the larynx. An endotracheal tube with an integrated camera (VST, VivaSight-SL, Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) may allow for direct guidance of the tube and may aid in endotracheal intubation in difficult airway patients. This tube has been evaluated in intensive care patients and in patients with morbid adiposity compared to DL, but there is a paucity of data in difficult airway patients, so far.
Therefore, we aim to test the VST in difficult airway patients compared to VL in a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial.
Patients will be assessed for eligibility in the Anesthesiology Pre-assessment Clinic of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf prior to elective surgery.
All patients receive a structured preoperative airway assessment in accordance with standard operating procedure of the Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf using the implemented in-house algorithm for the prediction of difficult airway management and the Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI).
Patients randomized to the intervention group will be intubated with a VST. Depending on gender and patient's size, tubes with inner diameters of 7.0, 7.5, and 8.0 are available. The tubes camera is connected to an Ambu aView monitor (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark). Patients randomized to the control group are intubated with a C-MAC videolaryngoscope (Karl Storz SE \& Co. KG, Tuttlingen, Germany) with a Macintosh type blade size 3 or 4 blade.
Anesthesia management, the choice of the blade and tube size, as well as the use of adjuncts like stylets, introducers or forceps or airway optimization maneuvers (e.g. backward upward rightward pressure [BURP] and optimum external laryngeal manipulation [OELM]) will be left to the discretion of the attending physician.
All intubations are recorded through the monitors for later review (e.g. Cormack-Lehane and POGO-score).
Based on an expected endtidal fraction of oxygen after intubation of 80% with a standard deviation of 8%, and a noninferiority margin of 10%, 2x 24 patients are required with errors of α=0.025 and β=0.2 (PASS version 08.0.6, NCSS, LLC. Kaysville, UT, USA).
All participating physicians are anesthesiology residents or fellows. To avoid a bias that may occur due to different skills for VL compared to the VST, physicians participating in this study take part in a structured manikin airway training. The age and months of work experience of the participating anesthetists will be assessed within a questionnaire. It has been shown that novice physicians are able to reliably intubate a manikin with the VST after a 30 min training session of DL and VST. For VL, it has been shown that novice physicians may intubate manikins set up to a difficult airway scenario after a brief introduction and five intubations with the VL and that anesthesiology residents may quickly adopt the use of the C-MAC VL.
Therefore, participating physicians are trained for 30 min under the supervision of an independent anesthetist before participating in this study.
- Conditions
- Airway Management
- Being tested
- VivaSight, Videolaryngoscopy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
VivaSightProcedure or surgery
see above
VideolaryngoscopyProcedure or surgery
Also called comparator
see above
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| VivaSight | Experimental | Intubated with a VivaSight-SL endotracheal tube. Receives: Procedure: VivaSight |
| Conventional | Active comparator | Intubated by videolaryngoscopy. Receives: Procedure: Videolaryngoscopy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
first-pass success
percentage of successful intubations with one attempt
Measured: 15 minutes
end-tidal oxygen fraction
the lowest end-tidal oxygen fraction within two minutes after successful intubation after a standardized preoxygenation
Measured: 15 minutes
Secondary outcomes (11)
overall success rate
percentage of successful intubations with the allocated procedure
Measured: 15 minutes
time to successful intubation
time until an endotracheal airway access is established
Measured: 15 minutes
time to successful intubation with one attempt
time until an endotracheal airway access is established in patients that are intubated at first attempt
Measured: 15 minutes
intubation difficulty
subjective rating on a visual analogue scale of the difficulty of airway management and questionnaire
Measured: 15 minutes
end-tidal carbondioxide fraction
the highest end-tidal carbondioxide fraction within two minutes after successful intubation
Measured: 15 minutes
number of attempts
total number of attempts until airway established
Measured: 15 minutes
aspiration
percentage of patients that vomit and aspirate during intubation
Measured: 15 minutes
esophageal intubation
percentage of accidental esophageal intubation attempts
Measured: 15 minutes
hypoxia
percentage of patients with a desaturation below a pulsoximetric saturation of 80%
Measured: 15 minutes
hypotension
percentage of patients with a systolic blood pressure below 70 mmHg
Measured: 15 minutes
intubating conditions
grades according to Cormack-Lehane and POGO
Measured: 15 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Aug 2020
- Study start27 Aug 2020
- Primary completion12 Feb 2021
- Study completion12 Feb 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Airway ManagementStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- randomized 1:1
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 48 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Joern Grensemann, MD, Study chair, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfMartin Petzoldt, MD, Study chair, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04501692
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- VivaOP
- Acronym
- VivaOP
- Status last verified
- Apr 2021
- First submitted
- 2 Aug 2020
- Last updated
- 8 Apr 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Apr 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Endotracheal Tube-mounted Camera Assisted Intubation Versus Videolaryngoscopic Intubation in Patients With Expected Difficult Airway - a Prospective Randomized Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04501692
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- VivaOP / VivaOP
- Conditions
- Airway Management
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 48 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 27 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 Feb 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Patients requiring endotracheal intubation for elective surgery with an expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) videolaryngoscopy or b) an endotracheal tube-mounted camera.
Detailed description
Endotracheal intubation is required for different surgical procedures for mechanical ventilation and to prevent aspiration of secretions. Endotracheal intubation is usually performed by direct laryngoscopy (DL), but this technique may fail in patients with a difficult airway, i.e. during otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery. Besides fiberoptic intubation that is regarded as gold standard, videolaryngoscopy (VL) has evolved as a valuable alternative technique in patients with a difficult airway. However, VL has its limitations and may also fail due to insufficient visualization of the larynx. An endotracheal tube with an integrated camera (VST, VivaSight-SL, Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) may allow for direct guidance of the tube and may aid in endotracheal intubation in difficult airway patients. This tube has been evaluated in intensive care patients and in patients with morbid adiposity compared to DL, but there is a paucity of data in difficult airway patients, so far.
Therefore, we aim to test the VST in difficult airway patients compared to VL in a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial.
Patients will be assessed for eligibility in the Anesthesiology Pre-assessment Clinic of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf prior to elective surgery.
All patients receive a structured preoperative airway assessment in accordance with standard operating procedure of the Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf using the implemented in-house algorithm for the prediction of difficult airway management and the Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI).
Patients randomized to the intervention group will be intubated with a VST. Depending on gender and patient's size, tubes with inner diameters of 7.0, 7.5, and 8.0 are available. The tubes camera is connected to an Ambu aView monitor (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark). Patients randomized to the control group are intubated with a C-MAC videolaryngoscope (Karl Storz SE \& Co. KG, Tuttlingen, Germany) with a Macintosh type blade size 3 or 4 blade.
Anesthesia management, the choice of the blade and tube size, as well as the use of adjuncts like stylets, introducers or forceps or airway optimization maneuvers (e.g. backward upward rightward pressure [BURP] and optimum external laryngeal manipulation [OELM]) will be left to the discretion of the attending physician.
All intubations are recorded through the monitors for later review (e.g. Cormack-Lehane and POGO-score).
Based on an expected endtidal fraction of oxygen after intubation of 80% with a standard deviation of 8%, and a noninferiority margin of 10%, 2x 24 patients are required with errors of α=0.025 and β=0.2 (PASS version 08.0.6, NCSS, LLC. Kaysville, UT, USA).
All participating physicians are anesthesiology residents or fellows. To avoid a bias that may occur due to different skills for VL compared to the VST, physicians participating in this study take part in a structured manikin airway training. The age and months of work experience of the participating anesthetists will be assessed within a questionnaire. It has been shown that novice physicians are able to reliably intubate a manikin with the VST after a 30 min training session of DL and VST. For VL, it has been shown that novice physicians may intubate manikins set up to a difficult airway scenario after a brief introduction and five intubations with the VL and that anesthesiology residents may quickly adopt the use of the C-MAC VL.
Therefore, participating physicians are trained for 30 min under the supervision of an independent anesthetist before participating in this study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- randomized 1:1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| VivaSight | Experimental | Procedure: VivaSightIntubated with a VivaSight-SL endotracheal tube. |
| Conventional | Active comparator | Procedure: VideolaryngoscopyIntubated by videolaryngoscopy. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients requiring general anesthesia with transoral tracheal intubation for elective surgery
- Age ≥ 18
- Preoperative airway assessment reveals an expected difficult airway (rated by the responsible anesthetist in the Pre-assessment Clinic based on the existing in-house algorithm)
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Pregnant or breastfeeding woman
- Confirmed indications for awake fiberoptic intubation especially due to enoral, pharyngeal tumors, abscesses or other processes
- Planned endotracheal intubation without deep anesthesia or neuromuscular blocking agents (e.g. awake videolaryngoscopy)
- Required transnasal tracheal intubation (e.g. for surgical reasons)
- Requirement of special endotracheal tubes such as laser or RAE tubes for surgical reasons
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| VivaSightsee above | Procedure or surgery | VivaSight |
| VideolaryngoscopyAlso: comparatorsee above | Procedure or surgery | Conventional |
Primary outcome
first-pass success
Time frame: 15 minutes
percentage of successful intubations with one attempt
end-tidal oxygen fraction
Time frame: 15 minutes
the lowest end-tidal oxygen fraction within two minutes after successful intubation after a standardized preoxygenation
11 secondary outcomes
overall success rate
Time frame: 15 minutes
time to successful intubation
Time frame: 15 minutes
time to successful intubation with one attempt
Time frame: 15 minutes
intubation difficulty
Time frame: 15 minutes
end-tidal carbondioxide fraction
Time frame: 15 minutes
number of attempts
Time frame: 15 minutes
aspiration
Time frame: 15 minutes
esophageal intubation
Time frame: 15 minutes
hypoxia
Time frame: 15 minutes
hypotension
Time frame: 15 minutes
intubating conditions
Time frame: 15 minutes
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Apr 2021.
Related trials for Airway Management
Not yet recruitingObservational study
LeHeR Maneuver vs Sniffing Position During Video Laryngoscopy in Predicted Difficult Airway
Difficult Airway, Difficult Intubation
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Sniffing Position vs Left Head Rotation (LeHeR) Maneuver for Glottic View During Direct Laryngoscopy
Difficult Intubation, Laryngoscopy
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Effect of Neuromuscular Blocking Agent Use on Video Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion
Airway Management, Supraglottic Airway Device Insertion
Not yet recruiting
Video Laryngeal Mask SaCoVLM Versus LMA Supreme and Ambu AuraGain in Children
Airway Management, Anesthesia, General
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Prediction of Difficult Mask Ventilation in Obese Population Undergoing Emergency Surgery
Difficult Airway Management
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Joern Grensemann, MD study chair
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
Martin Petzoldt, MD study chair
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing VivaSight and Videolaryngoscopy in people with Airway Management, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Apr 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
first-pass success (time frame: 15 minutes). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Apr 2021.