MedTrace Logo

RIFL (Rigid and Flexing Laryngoscope) vs. Fiberoptic Bronchoscope

NCT01965938 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 41

Last updated 2017-01-05

Study results available
· View outcomes & findings →

Summary

We will conduct a randomized trial comparing the success rate and time to intubation using the RIFL vs. the fiberoptic bronchoscope, as the latter is commonly held to be the gold standard of difficult airway devices. Specifically, we wish to compare the of intubation between the two devices in patients with potentially difficult airways as defined by an oropharyngeal class 3-4, BMI greater than 35, or in patients with a history of difficult intubation using direct laryngoscopy.

Conditions

  • Intubation; Difficult

Interventions

DEVICE

RIFL (Rigid and Flexing Laryngoscope)

Patients in the RIFL group will undergo bronchoscopy using the Rigid and Flexing Laryngoscope. Once the carina is visualized with the bronchoscope, the endotracheal tube will be advanced, and the bronchoscope removed.

DEVICE

Fiberoptic Bronchoscope

Patients in the control group will undergo bronchoscopy using the flexible fiberoptic bronchoscope. Once the carina is visualized with the bronchoscope, the endotracheal tube will be advanced, and the bronchoscope removed.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Vanderbilt University

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Bret Alvis, M.D. · Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2012-09-30
Primary Completion
2013-07-31
Completion
2013-07-31

Countries

  • United States

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT01965938 on ClinicalTrials.gov