Airway ManagementVieScOPNCT04724408
VieScope Versus Direct Laryngoscopic Intubation
A study testing VieScope and Conventional in people with Airway Management, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
Patients requiring endotracheal intubation for elective surgery without expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) VieScope or b) conventional direct laryngoscopy. 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?
- VieScope and Conventional
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 58 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- 26 Jan 2021to 1 Mar 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 non-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 Intubation With VieScope Versus Direct Laryngoscopic Intubation in Patients for Elective Surgery - a Prospective Randomized Trial.
Patients requiring endotracheal intubation for elective surgery without expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) VieScope or b) conventional direct laryngoscopy.
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), i.e. during otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery. This technique has limitations and may fail due to insufficient visualization of the larynx. A new device has been introduced that consists of an illuminated straight plastic tube for laryngoscopy (VSC, Vie Scope, Adroit Surgical, Oklahoma City, OK, USA) that enables for indirect intubation over a stylet. So far, the VSC has shown promising results in manikin studies for intubation in normal and difficult airways and was shown to be superior over conventional laryngoscopy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with providers wearing personal protective equipment. Data in elective patients undergoing otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery are not available, so far.
Therefore, we aim to test the VSC in patients compared to conventional techniques in a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial. We aim to test the VSC in predicted non-difficult airway patients.
Patients will be assessed for eligibility in the Anesthesiology Pre-assessment Clinic of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf prior to elective surgery. To rule out a difficult airway prior to study inclusion, 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 are randomized 1:1 to either intervention or control group. Patients randomized to the intervention group will be intubated with the VSC. Patients randomized to the control group are intubated with a standard MacIntosh type laryngoscope by DL. 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.
Based on a first attempt success rate of 40%, and a noninferiority margin of 5%, 2x 29 patients are required with errors of α=0.025 and β=0.2 to show non-inferiority for the intervention method (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 VSC compared to conventional laryngoscopy, physicians participating in this study take part in a 30 min structured manikin airway training before participating in this study. The age and months of work experience of the participating anesthetists will be assessed within a questionnaire.
- Conditions
- Airway Management
- Being tested
- VieScope, Conventional
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
VieScopeDevice
see above
ConventionalDevice
see above
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| VieScope | Experimental | intubation with the VieScope laryngoscope Receives: Device: VieScope |
| Conventional | Active comparator | intubation with MacIntosh-type laryngoscope Receives: Device: Conventional |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
First attempt success rate
percentage of successful intubations with one attempt
Measured: 15 min
Secondary outcomes (11)
intubating conditions
grades according to Cormack-Lehane and POGO
Measured: 15 min
overall success rate
percentage of successful intubations with the allocated procedure
Measured: 15 min
time to successful intubation
time until an endotracheal airway access is established
Measured: 15 min
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 min
intubation difficulty
subjective rating on a visual analogue scale (0-100, higher values indicate more difficult intubation) of the difficulty of airway management and questionnaire
Measured: 15 min
end-tidal carbondioxide fraction
the highest end-tidal carbondioxide fraction in the exspiratory gas within two minutes after successful intubation
Measured: 15 min
number of attempts
total number of attempts until airway established
Measured: 15 min
aspiration
percentage of patients that vomit and aspirate during intubation
Measured: 15 min
esophageal intubation
percentage of accidental esophageal intubation attempts
Measured: 15 min
hypoxia
percentage of patients with a desaturation below a pulsoximetric saturation of 80%
Measured: 15 min
hypotension
percentage of patients with a systolic blood pressure below 70 mmHg
Measured: 15 min
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jan 2021
- Study start26 Jan 2021
- Primary completion1 Mar 2021
- Study completion1 Mar 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.
- More trials run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- 58 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
- NCT04724408
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- VieScOP
- Acronym
- VieScOP
- Status last verified
- Apr 2021
- First submitted
- 23 Jan 2021
- Last updated
- 8 Apr 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
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 Intubation With VieScope Versus Direct Laryngoscopic Intubation in Patients for Elective Surgery - a Prospective Randomized Trial.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04724408
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- VieScOP / VieScOP
- Conditions
- Airway Management
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 58 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 26 Jan 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Mar 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Jan 2021 (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 without expected difficult airway are randomized to be intubated either by a) VieScope or b) conventional direct laryngoscopy.
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), i.e. during otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery. This technique has limitations and may fail due to insufficient visualization of the larynx. A new device has been introduced that consists of an illuminated straight plastic tube for laryngoscopy (VSC, Vie Scope, Adroit Surgical, Oklahoma City, OK, USA) that enables for indirect intubation over a stylet. So far, the VSC has shown promising results in manikin studies for intubation in normal and difficult airways and was shown to be superior over conventional laryngoscopy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with providers wearing personal protective equipment. Data in elective patients undergoing otorhinolaryngologic or oral and maxillofacial surgery are not available, so far.
Therefore, we aim to test the VSC in patients compared to conventional techniques in a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial. We aim to test the VSC in predicted non-difficult airway patients.
Patients will be assessed for eligibility in the Anesthesiology Pre-assessment Clinic of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf prior to elective surgery. To rule out a difficult airway prior to study inclusion, 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 are randomized 1:1 to either intervention or control group. Patients randomized to the intervention group will be intubated with the VSC. Patients randomized to the control group are intubated with a standard MacIntosh type laryngoscope by DL. 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.
Based on a first attempt success rate of 40%, and a noninferiority margin of 5%, 2x 29 patients are required with errors of α=0.025 and β=0.2 to show non-inferiority for the intervention method (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 VSC compared to conventional laryngoscopy, physicians participating in this study take part in a 30 min structured manikin airway training before participating in this study. The age and months of work experience of the participating anesthetists will be assessed within a questionnaire.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| VieScope | Experimental | Device: VieScopeintubation with the VieScope laryngoscope |
| Conventional | Active comparator | Device: Conventionalintubation with MacIntosh-type laryngoscope |
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 non-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 |
|---|---|---|
| VieScopesee above | Device | VieScope |
| Conventionalsee above | Device | Conventional |
Primary outcome
First attempt success rate
Time frame: 15 min
percentage of successful intubations with one attempt
11 secondary outcomes
intubating conditions
Time frame: 15 min
overall success rate
Time frame: 15 min
time to successful intubation
Time frame: 15 min
time to successful intubation with one attempt
Time frame: 15 min
intubation difficulty
Time frame: 15 min
end-tidal carbondioxide fraction
Time frame: 15 min
number of attempts
Time frame: 15 min
aspiration
Time frame: 15 min
esophageal intubation
Time frame: 15 min
hypoxia
Time frame: 15 min
hypotension
Time frame: 15 min
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.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Airway Management
Not yet recruiting
Title of Study: Anesthesiologists' Learning Curves for Ultrasound Assessment of Difficult Airway
Airway Ultrasound, Difficult Airway Management
RecruitingObservational study
Airway Ultrasound in Oncologic Maxillofacial Patients
Head and Neck Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Construction and Validation of an Impulse Oscillometry (IOS)-Based Platform for Screening, Diagnosis, and Management of Chronic Airway Diseases
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), Asthma (Diagnosis)
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
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 VieScope and Conventional 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 attempt success rate (time frame: 15 min). 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.