Submental Endotracheal Intubation: An Alternative to Tracheotomy in Patients with Midfacial and Panfacial Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The submental route for endotracheal intubation has been proposed as an alternative to tracheotomy in the surgical management of patients with maxillofacial trauma. The purpose of this study was to review our experience with this procedure. METHODS: Medical records of 25 patients who had surgical reduction of midfacial or panfacial fractures while securing their airway with submental intubation were reviewed. After standard orotracheal intubation, a passage was created by blunt dissection with a hemostat clamp through the floor of the mouth in the submental area. The proximal end of the orotracheal tube was pulled through the submental incision. Surgery was completed with minimal interference from the endotracheal tube. At the end of surgery, the tube was pulled back to the usual oral route. RESULTS: Mean duration of surgery was 7.9 hours (range, 2-16 hours). Mean duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation was 5.2 days (range, 1-24 days). Fourteen of these patients required prolonged (>24 hours) postoperative mechanical ventilation because of associated injuries. Two patients later required a tracheotomy because of prolonged respiratory failure. One patient died of multiple organ failure. One complication of the submental intubation was observed: a superficial infection of the submental wound. CONCLUSION: Submental intubation is a simple technique associated with a low morbidity. It is an attractive alternative to tracheotomy in the surgical management of selected cases of maxillofacial trauma.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".