Vol. 7, Issue 2, Part A (2025)

Background: Airway management in patients with anticipated difficult airways poses a significant challenge in anesthetic practice. The aim of this research differentiates the performance of the King Vision Video Laryngoscope (KL Group) with Macintosh Laryngoscope (ML Group).

Materials and Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomly divided into two groups of 30 each. Group ML underwent direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh blade, while Group KL was intubated using the King Vision Video Laryngoscope. A single experienced anesthesiologist performed all intubations. Parameters were evaluated including time to intubation, first-attempt success rate, optimization maneuvers, Cormack-Lehane (CL) grade, and complications.

Results: Two groups were equivalent in terms of demographic data, ASA grade, and predictive airway parameters. Mean intubation time was significantly lower in the KL group (53.8 seconds) compared to the ML group (66.13 seconds; p< 0.05). First-attempt success was higher in the KL group (66.7%) than in the ML group (50%), though not statistically significant (P = 0.19). The KL group required significantly fewer optimization maneuvers compared to group ML (P = 0.01) and group KL demonstrated significant better glottic visualization with a lower cormack- lehane (CL) grade compared to group ML (P = 0.024). Complication rates were lesser in the KL group comparable to ML group.

Conclusion: The King Vision Video Laryngoscope outperformed the Macintosh Laryngoscope in predicted difficult airway scenarios, offering faster intubation, improved laryngeal view, and reduced need for additional maneuvers, thus supporting its preferential use in difficult airway management.