~ 14 ~ International Journal of Medical Anesthesiology 2021; 4(1): 14-19 E-ISSN: 2664-3774 P-ISSN: 2664-3766 www.anesthesiologypaper.com IJMA 2021; 4(1): 14-19 Received: 03-11-2020 Accepted: 12-12-2020 Dr. Shwethapriya R Associate Professor, Department of Critical Care, KMC Manipal, MAHE University, Karnataka, India Dr. Manjunath Prabhu Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, KMC Manipal, MAHE University, Karnataka, India Dr. Souvik Chaudhury Assistant Professor, Department of Critical Care, KMC Manipal, MAHE University, Karnataka, India Corresponding Author: Dr. Shwethapriya R Associate Professor, Department of Critical Care, KMC Manipal, MAHE University, Karnataka, India A comparison of blind and lightwand guided tracheal intubation through the intubating laryngeal mask airway Dr. Shwethapriya R, Dr. Manjunath Prabhu and Dr. Souvik Chaudhury DOI: https://doi.org/10.33545/26643766.2021.v4.i1a.189 Abstract The purpose of our study was to compare blind versus lightwand guided technique of intubation through the ILMA with respect to success of intubation, time taken for successful intubation and incidence of pharyngolaryngeal morbidity. A written and informed consent for participation in the study was obtained from the patients selected. Patients were kept nil per oral as per the standard protocol. Patients were randomly allocated to one of two equal sized groups (n=30 each). A random number table was used for randomization and they were divided to two groups. Intubation through the ILMA was successful in all 60 patients involved in the study, with an overall success rate of 100%. There was no statistical difference in the median intubation time between the two groups as determined by the Mann Whitney U test. However, intubation times in the blind group had a skewed distribution as indicated by the large standard deviation. Whereas, the lightwand group had intubation times closer to the mean. Keywords: Blind and lightwand, tracheal intubation, laryngeal mask airway Introduction Airway management is a vital skill required for the anaesthesiologists to successfully manage a case of anticipated or unanticipated difficult airway [1] . Several airway devices and techniques can be employed in such situations. Intubating laryngeal mask airway and the illuminated stylet are two such devices which have gained popularity for management of difficult airways [2] . The purpose of our study was to compare blind versus lightwand guided technique of intubation through the ILMA with respect to success of intubation, time taken for successful intubation and incidence of pharyngolaryngeal morbidity. We conducted this study to evaluate the usefulness of the flexible lightwand as an aid for intubation through the ILMA. We compared the success rate, the time for intubation and the number of adjustment manoeuvres required to achieve successful intubation, with the blind technique of intubation through the ILMA. We also assessed the incidence of postoperative complications such as sore throat and hoarseness of voice. Methodology The study was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Following the ethical committee approval, sixty adult patients, aged between 18 to 65 years of ASA physical status I or II, weighing between 30 to 70 kgs, scheduled for elective surgery requiring general anaesthesia and endotracheal intubation were enrolled for the study. Patients with known or predicted difficult airway, diseases of the respiratory system, history of sore throat in the last 10 days, known gastro-esophageal reflux disease or other esophageal pathology, body mass index > 30kg m -2 , ischaemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and intracranial mass lesions, history suggestive of obstructive sleep apnoea and conditions requiring rapid sequence induction were excluded from the study. A written and informed consent for participation in the study was obtained from the patients selected. Patients were kept nil per oral as per the standard protocol. Patients were randomly allocated to one of two equal sized groups (n=30 each). A random number table was used for randomization and they were divided to one of the following two groups. 1. Blind: patients were blindly intubated through the ILMA (LMA Fastrach TM , Laryngeal MASK Company Limited, Henley-on-Thames, UK).