Can we predict a difficult intubation in cleft lip/palate patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To find predictors of a difficult intubation in infants with an isolated or a syndromic cleft lip/palate. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review: single-blind trial. SETTINGS: Tertiary care centre. METHODS: A total of 145 infants born with cleft lip/palate were enrolled. Three clinical and seven lip/palate anatomic parameters were evaluated. The grade of intubation was determined by the anesthesiologist at the time of the labioplasty/staphylorrhaphy surgery at 3 and 10 months, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Intubation grade. RESULTS: The relative risk of a difficult intubation in the cleft lip, cleft palate without the Pierre Robin sequence, cleft lip-palate, and cleft palate with Pierre Robin sequence groups was 0, 2.7, 10, and 23%, respectively. The infants born with the Pierre Robin sequence had a statistically significant higher intubation grade. The degree of difficulty was increased in cases with early airway and feeding problems (p < .0001). Within the group of cleft palate patients without any lip malformation, a wider cleft was associated with a higher intubation grade with statistical significance (p = .0323). CONCLUSIONS: Infants born with Pierre Robin sequence have a statistically significantly higher risk of difficult intubation. Within this group, of all the studied factors, a clinical history of early airway and feeding problems was the best predictor of a difficult endotracheal intubation. In cleft palate patients without any cleft lip, larger width of the cleft is also a significant predictor.
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) | 0.000 | 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".