Many modified Mallampati tests have been developed to date. Samsoon’s modified Mallampati test (standard Mallampati test) is currently widely used. We newly designed seven types of assessment protocol of Mallampati test, in addition to standard Mallampati test. In this study, we studied the correlation between eight types of protocol (standard and seven alternative protocols) of Mallampati test and Cormack–Lehane test. We newly designed assessment protocols as new Mallampati test. These are different protocols depending on the presence or absence of phonation, those of protrusion of tongue, and sitting position or supine position. The oropharyngeal structures visualized by these eight types of Mallampati test for total of 145 patients undergoing dental oral surgery were evaluated. The scores derived via eight types of Mallampati test were recorded. The influence of phonation, tongue protrusion and body position on Mallampati test score was analyzed, respectively. The relationships between eight types of Mallampati test and Cormack–Lehane test were analyzed. Tongue protrusion, phonation and sitting position tended to lower the score of Mallampati test (p < 0.001, respectively). The standard Mallampati test was not correlated with Cormack–Lehane test. In the new Mallampati tests, assessment protocol with tongue protrusion, phonation and sitting position, that with tongue protrusion and supine position, or that with tongue protrusion, phonation and supine position were significantly correlated with Cormack–Lehane test, respectively. (p = 0.020, p = 0.007 and p = 0.004, respectively). The standard Mallampati test did not correlate with Cormack–Lehane test. Mallampati test with phonation, tongue protrusion and supine position were most correlated with Cormack–Lehane test.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Mallampati SR, Gatt SP, Gugino LD, Desai SP, Waraksa B, Freiberger D, et al. A clinical sign to predict difficult tracheal intubation: a prospective study. Can Anaesth Soc J. 1985;32(4):429–34.
Samsoon GL, Young JR. Difficult tracheal intubation: a retrospective study. Anaesthesia. 1987;42(5):487–90.
Connor CW, Segal S. The importance of subjective facial appearance on the ability of anesthesiologists to predict difficult intubation. Anesth Analg. 2014;118(2):419–27.
Bindra A, Prabhakar H, Singh GP, Ali Z, Singhal V. Is the modified Mallampati test performed in supine position a reliable predictor of difficult tracheal intubation? J Anesth. 2010;24(3):482–5.
Oates JD, Oates PD, Pearsall FJ, McLeod AD, Howie JC. Phonation affects Mallampati class. Anaesthesia. 1990;45(11):984.
Singhal V, Sharma M, Prabhakar H, Ali Z, Singh GP. Effect of posture on mouth opening and modified Mallampati classification for airway assessment. J Anesth. 2009;23(3):463–5.
Lee SL, Hosford C, Lee QT, Parnes SM, Shapshay SM. Mallampati class, obesity, and a novel airway trajectory measurement to predict difficult laryngoscopy. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(1):161–6.
Cormack RS, Lehane J. Difficult tracheal intubation in obstetrics. Anaesthesia. 1984;39(11):1105–11.
Bindra A, Prabhakar H. In reply to comment on ‘‘Is the modified Mallampati test performed in supine position a reliable predictor of difficult tracheal intubation?’’. J Anesth. 2011;25:136.
Bindra A, Prabhakar H, Singh GP, Ali Z, Singhal V. Erratum to: Is the modified Mallampati test performed in supine position a reliable predictor of difficult tracheal intubation? J Anesth. 2011;25:137.
Moon HY, Baek CW, Kim JS, Koo GH, Kim JY, Woo YC, et al. The causes of difficult tracheal intubation and preoperative assessments in different age groups. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2013;64(4):308–14.
Namasivayam AM, Steele CM, Keller H. The effect of tongue strength on meal consumption in long term care. Clin Nutr. 2016;35(5):1078–83.
Amadasun FE, Adudu OP, Sadiq A. Effects of position and phonation on oropharyngeal view and correlation with laryngoscpic view. Niger J Clin Pract. 2010;13(4):417–20.
Huber JE. Effects of utterance length and vocal loudness on speech breathing in older adults. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2008;164(3):323–30.
Safavi M, Honarmand A, Amoushahi M. Prediction of difficult laryngoscopy: extended mallampati score vs. the MMT ULBT and RHTMD. Adv Biomed Res. 2014;3:133.
Ouchi K, Sugiyama K. Remifentanil does not increase urine output during oral surgery, contrary to its effect during other surgeries—a cohort study. Rev Bras Anestesiol. 2017;67(4):342–6.
Ouchi K, Sugiyama K. Cuff depth and continuous chest auscultation method for determination of tracheal tube insertion depth in nasal intubation: observational study. J Anesth. 2016;30(2):193–8.
Ouchi K, Sugiyama K. Hypotonic fluid reduce serum sodium compared to isotonic fluids during anesthesia induction in pediatric patients undergoing maxillofacial surgery-type of infusion affects blood electrolytes and glucose: an observational study. BMC Pediatr. 2016;16:112.
Kandray DP, Juruaz D, Yacovone M, Chang GA. Inter-rater reliability of the Mallampati classification for patients in a dental hygiene clinic. J Dent Hyg. 2013;87(3):134–9.
Mashour GA, Sandberg WS. Craniocervical extension improves the specificity and predictive value of the Mallampati airway evaluation. Anesth Analg. 2006;103(5):1256–9.
Menon SM, Sampangiramaiah S, Mathew M. Cross Sectional Observational Study Performed to See for Relation of Mallampati Score and Extended Mallampati Score with Body Mass Index. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(5):UG01–UG03.
Bindra A, Prabhakar H, Bithal PK, Singh GP, Chowdhury T. Predicting difficult laryngoscopy in acromegalic patients undergoing surgery for excision of pituitary tumors: a comparison of extended Mallampati score with modified Mallampati classification. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29(2):187–90.
Parish M, Paknezhad SP, Bilan M, Esfanjani RM, Soleimanpour H. Extended neck mallampati in supine position for predicting difficult airway in diabetic patients. J Clin Anesth. 2020;60:107–8.
Mahmoodpoor A, Soleimanpour H, Golzari SE, Nejabatian A, Pourlak T, Amani M, et al. Determination of the diagnostic value of the Modified Mallampati score, upper lip bite test and facial angle in predicting difficult intubation: a prospective descriptive study. J Clin Anesth. 2017;37:99–102.
The authors thank Dr. Shigeki Joseph Luke (old fellow of our department) for his help with study design and data collection. We also thank Dr. Takeshi Yokoyama (chair of our department) for his help with manuscript reviewing. We would like to thank all anesthesiologists of our clinical department for their help with data collection. This work was supported by intradepartmental funds.
This work was supported by the departmental research fund of Kyushu University.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Ouchi, K., Hosokawa, R., Yamanaka, H. et al. Mallampati test with phonation, tongue protrusion and supine position is most correlated with Cormack–Lehane test. Odontology (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00490-3
- Mallampati classification
- Cormack–Lehane classification
- Airway management
- General anesthesia
- And tracheal intubation