Comparison of the Airtraq laryngoscope and the GlideScope for double-lumen tube intubation in patients with predicted normal airways: a prospective randomized trial

Table 2 Intubation data of the two laryngoscopes

	Group A (n = 35)	Group G (n = 35)	P-value
Intubation time (s)	36.6 ± 20.2 (12–91)	54.6 ± 25.7 (28–133)	P = 0.002*
Success rate of first intubation attempt (n, %)	33 (94%)	34 (97%)	0.55
Intubation difficulty scale (IDS) (0/1/2/3/4, n)	10/17/5/2/1	9/13/7/5/1	0.327
Ease of laryngoscope insertion (0/1/2/3, n)	33/1/1/0	33/2/0/0	0.98
Ease of tube advancement (0/1/2/3, n)	24/3/5/3	26/3/5/1	0.525
Sore throat (n, %)	6 (17%)	8 (23%)	0.766
DLT sizes (39 F/37 F/35 F, n)	15/12/8	12/12/11	0.378
DLT type (left/right sided)	23/12	28/7	0.182

Group A: the patients were intubated with the Airtraq laryngoscope; Group G: the patients were intubated with the GlideScope. IDS score (0/1/2/3/4) as explained by Adnet, et al. [18]. Ease of laryngoscope insertion and tube advancement (0 = very easy, 1 = easy, 2 = difficult, 3 = very difficult). Data are presented as mean ± standard deviations (ranges) or as the numbers of patients, * statistically significant difference between two groups.

ISSN: 1471-2253