Parapharyngeal abscess following use of a laryngeal mask airway during open revision septorhinoplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is an established safe tool to support the airway during surgery under general anesthetic. It is commonly used both in North America and abroad. Complications with this device are rare. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 50-year old female developed a parapharyngeal neck abscess following an uneventful septorhinoplasty during use of an LMA Classic. The patient had symptoms of pain and difficulty swallowing. CT revealed extensive soft tissue edema and swelling in the right and posterior neck involving the right parapharyngeal space, right parotid space, minimal involvement of the right submandibular space, and extending across the retropharyngeal space. The abscess was incised and drained with an open approach, combined with laryngoscopy to evaluate the site of the infection at the right pyriform fossa. The patient fully recovered following discharge. DISCUSSION: Despite the rare incidence of LMA injuries, early recognition of parapharyngeal neck abscesses can initiate early treatment and prevention of spread to retropharyngeal space where airway obstruction and emergent complications may occur. CONCLUSION: Laryngeal mask airways have a high rate of success and low rate of complications. In this reported case, pressure necrosis from over-inflation of the LMA is thought to have perforated the right pyriform fossa. The perforation created a communication into the parapharyngeal space causing infection. We report this case to highlight the importance of identifying possible complications associated with a routine method of airway management during shared airway surgeries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".