An Animal Model for Endotracheal Tube–Related Laryngeal Injury Using Hypoxic Ventilation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore whether hypoxic ventilation could allow a practical animal model of laryngotracheal injury secondary to endotracheal intubation. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled animal study. SETTING: Animal laboratory in a tertiary pediatric hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eight Sus scrofa piglets (15-18 kg) were anesthetized and intubated for 4 hours, with a 6-mm cuffed endotracheal tube. They were randomly assigned to either constant hypoxic ventilation (oxygen saturation under 70%) or nonhypoxic ventilation. Endotracheal tube cuff pressure was manually controlled and maintained at a constant level. After 4 hours, fluorescein dye was administered intravenously to highlight areas of hypoperfusion within the larynx. The animals were euthanized at the end of the procedure, and the larynx and trachea were harvested for gross and histological examination. The pathologist was blinded to the ventilation group. The severity of laryngeal injury was graded between 0 and 4 by a senior pathologist. RESULTS: The experiment protocol was successfully completed in all animal subjects. The animals undergoing hypoxic ventilation showed a significantly higher median injury grade than the nonhypoxic animals (2 vs 1, respectively; P = .003). Damage was significantly worse in the hypoxic group at all anatomical sublevels. CONCLUSIONS: Endotracheal tube-related laryngeal injury was demonstrated after only 4 hours of intubation using this animal model, and hypoxic ventilation increased the severity of injury. This study therefore provides an animal model that may be suitable for future investigation and prevention of intubation injury.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".