Advancing emergency airway management: Video laryngoscope vs intubating laryngeal mask airway in critical care

Figure 1 Bar chart displaying total intubation time (mean ± SD), oxygen saturation trends over procedure intervals (mean ± SD), and complication rates (%) between video laryngoscope (n = 32) and intubating laryngeal mask airway (n = 26/32) groups. Data demonstrate video laryngoscope (VL)’s superior efficiency and safety profile. A: Shows intubation time as a bar chart with VL (44.0 ± 19.7 seconds) significantly shorter than intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) (82.5 ± 14.5 seconds); B: Displays dual line graphs of SpO₂ trends over six timepoints, both stable above 95% post-insertion; C: Uses grouped bars for complications, highlighting ILMA’s higher rates across all categories. ILMA: Intubating laryngeal mask airway; VL: Video laryngoscope.