# Comparison of AceScope With Tube-Channelled Blade Versus McGRATH MAC Video Laryngoscope With Non-channelled Blade in a Difficult-Airway Manikin Model

## TL;DR

This study compares two video laryngoscopes in a simulated difficult airway scenario and finds one reduces intubation time.

## Contribution

The study introduces a new video laryngoscope with a tube-channelled blade and evaluates its performance in a manikin model.

## Key findings

- AceScope reduced intubation time by 3 seconds compared to McGRATH in difficult airway scenarios.
- No significant differences were found in user satisfaction or intubation success rates between the two devices.
- Neither device caused dental damage in the manikin model.

## Abstract

Background and Objectives: The AceScope (Ace Medical Co., Ltd, Seoul, Republic of Korea) is a new Macintosh video laryngoscope equipped with a tube-channelled type blade. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the AceScope with a tube-channelled type blade compared to the McGRATH MAC video laryngoscope (Medtronic plc, Galway, Ireland) with a non-channelled type blade in a difficult airway model.

Materials and methods: Twelve experienced anesthesiologists performed tracheal intubation on a difficult airway manikin using both devices. The primary outcome measured was intubation time. Secondary outcomes included user satisfaction, intubation success rate, and dental damage rate.

Results: The AceScope with a tube-channelled type blade significantly reduced intubation time compared to the McGRATH with a non-channelled type blade (16 vs. 19 seconds, p=0.04). There were no significant differences in user satisfaction or intubation success rates between the two devices, and no tooth injuries were observed with either device.

Conclusions: The AceScope with a tube-channelled type blade is more effective in reducing intubation time in difficult airway scenarios than the McGRATH with a non-channelled type blade. However, these findings are limited to manikin models.