Modified and Newly Designed Right-sided Double-lumen Endobronchial Tubes Are Complementary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
University Heart and Lung Institute at Laval Hospital, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada. jean.bussieres@anr.ulaval.caWe read with great interest the case report1on the application of a newly designed right-sided, double-lumen endobronchial tube (R-DLT) in patients with a very short right mainstem bronchus.However, in citing our work2on the improvement of the endobronchial positioning of the R-DLT, Hagihira et al. stated that we modified the design of the bronchial cuff and that these changes seem to offer little improvement. This statement is inconsistent with our published manuscript which demonstrates, on a randomized series of 80 patients, that the modified enlarged area of the lateral orifice (and not the bronchial cuff as stated by Hagihira et al. ) improve the success rate of final positioning from 74 to 97% with a P < 0.0109. These two new versions of the R-DLT are not intended to solve the same problem, but the final objective, improvement of the use of R-DLT, is similar.We thank Dr. Hagihira for this interesting case report. While this new R-DLT may become a useful tool for thoracic anesthesiologists, we would first encourage them to validate its use with a randomized study.University Heart and Lung Institute at Laval Hospital, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada. jean.bussieres@anr.ulaval.ca
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".