Use of silicone tracheal stoma stents for temporary tracheostomy in dogs with upper airway obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To report the use of silicone tracheal stoma stents for temporary tracheostomy in dogs with upper airway obstruction. METHODS: Retrospective review of medical records for dogs in which silicone tracheal stoma stents were placed. RESULTS: Eighteen dogs had a silicone tracheal stoma stent placed for maintenance of a tracheostomy stoma for periods ranging from three hours to eight months. No intra-operative or immediate postoperative complications were recorded. In 11 dogs the stent was removed by simple traction after a period ranging from 36 hours to 6 weeks, and the tracheal stoma was left to heal by second intention. Five of the 18 dogs were determined as being tracheostomy dependent and underwent conversion to permanent tracheostomy after a period ranging from five days to eight months following stent placement. One dog was euthanased after three months, with the stent still in place, because of poor respiratory function, and one dog died of unrelated reasons. In 6 of 10 dogs (60%) where the stent was in place for five days or more, granulation tissue formation caused dislodgement of the stent. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Silicone tracheal stoma stents may be used as an alternative to conventional tracheostomy tubes in selected dogs with upper airway obstruction. Long-term use of the stent beyond five days is not recommended because of granulation tissue formation. The long-term consequences of partial tracheal ring resection are unknown.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".