McGrath videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation: A multicenter randomized clinical trial
Primary result · Grade 1 viewResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 1.24 95% CI 0.85–1.79Authors' conclusion
In adult patients undergoing RSI, McGrath videolaryngoscopy did not improve glottic visualization or first-pass intubation success compared with direct laryngoscopy, and was associated with a modestly longer intubation time.
Study context
- Population
- Adults undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery requiring rapid sequence intubation (RSI)
- Participants
- 400 adults
- Comparison
- McGrath videolaryngoscopy (VL) vs direct laryngoscopy (DL) for RSI
- VLn = 193
- DLn = 201reference
- Primary endpoint
- Glottic visualization (modified Cormack-Lehane classification)
Methodological detailsmulticentre, patient-blinded
- Multicentre
- Patient-blinded
Primary result
Grade 1 view
Odds ratio
1.24
95% CI 0.85–1.79
P = 0.26
By group
VL vs DL
OR 1.24 (95% CI 0.85–1.79); P = 0.26
As reported in the abstract
Secondary outcomes
First-attempt intubation success
P = 0.76
Intubation failure
P = 0.29
Median, s
| Outcome | VL | DL | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to intubation | 35 | 30 | 1.27 (1.04–1.56) | P = 0.016 | |
| 0.512Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Safety
Airway trauma and postoperative complications
- Low and comparable rates in both groups
Original publication
McGrath videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for rapid sequence intubation: A multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Clin Anesth. Published 17 February 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →