A multicentre randomised controlled trial of the McGrath™ Mac videolaryngoscope versus conventional laryngoscopy

Abstract

SummaryBefore completion of this study, there was insufficient evidence demonstrating the superiority of videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy for elective tracheal intubation. We hypothesised that using videolaryngoscopy for routine tracheal intubation would result in higher first‐pass tracheal intubation success compared with direct laryngoscopy. In this multicentre randomised trial, 2092 adult patients without predicted difficult airway requiring tracheal intubation for elective surgery were allocated randomly to either videolaryngoscopy with a Macintosh blade (McGrath™) or direct laryngoscopy. First‐pass tracheal intubation success was higher with the McGrath (987/1053, 94%), compared with direct laryngoscopy (848/1039, 82%); absolute risk reduction (95%CI) was 12.1% (10.9–13.6%). This resulted in a relative risk (95%CI) of unsuccessful tracheal intubation at first attempt of 0.34 (0.26–0.45; p < 0.001) for McGrath compared with direct laryngoscopy. Cormack and Lehane grade ≥ 3 was observed more frequently with direct laryngoscopy (84/1039, 8%) compared with McGrath (8/1053, 0.7%; p < 0.001) No significant difference in tracheal intubation‐associated adverse events was observed between groups. This study demonstrates that using McGrath videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy improves first‐pass tracheal intubation success in patients having elective surgery. Practitioners may consider using this device as first choice for tracheal intubation.