Inadvertent Endotracheal Cuff Hyperinflation Diagnosed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ENDOTRACHEAL tube (ETT) cuff hyperinflation was incidentally diagnosed in a 5-yr-old maintained on N2O-free general anesthesia (Microcuff, 4.5 mm, inflated with 1.8 ml of air) during cardiac magnetic resonance imaging preceding catheterization. Magnetic resonance angiograms reformatted in coronal (image A) and sagittal (image B) planes of the trachea demonstrate pronounced tracheal distention (thin arrow) at the ETT cuff site, with a thinner contrast-enhanced layer of the tracheal wall (thick arrow), suggesting a degree of mucosal compression. Subsequent cuff manometer measurement demonstrated a pressure of 30 cm H2O, indicating that too high of an airway pressure was applied when testing for an air leak.Cuff overinflation is associated with complications secondary to compromise of tracheal mucosal perfusion and compression of nearby structures, including sore throat, postextubation stridor, laryngeal or tracheal lesions, vocal cord paralysis, and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury.1 Although intracuff pressures of at least 25 to 30 cm H2O are recommended in adults, a lower limit of at most 15 to 20 cm H2O in children is supported by the literature.2,3 Small volumes of inflated air in ETTs can inadvertently lead to cuff diameters 2 to 2.5 times the age-corresponding internal tracheal diameter and intracuff pressures up to 120 cm H2O, including in ETTs designed with high-volume, low-pressure cuffs.3Thus, cuff inflation should be periodically evaluated during anesthesia to assure that overinflation is not present. Cuff pressure is assessed by palpation of the pilot balloon, abolition of air leak at a continuous positive airway pressure of 20 cm H2O, or cuff manometry.2 However, the former clinical endpoints alone are associated with significant cuff hyperinflation.1The authors declare no competing interests.
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".