Airway Management in Pierre Robin Sequence: The Vancouver Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pierre Robin sequence (PRS) is a triad of micrognathia, glossoptosis, and respiratory distress. There is no standard clinical classification used in the management of neonatal airway in patients with PRS. The goal of our study was to review the presentation and management of patients with PRS and formulate a clinical grading system and treatment algorithm. METHODS: A 10-year retrospective review of all neonates diagnosed with PRS was performed after obtaining institutional ethics approval. Patients were identified using our cleft lip and palate program database. Inclusion criteria were 2 of the following 3 clinical features-glossoptosis, retrognathia, or airway obstruction. We collected demographic data, clinical information (coexisting airway morbidity, maxillary-mandibular discrepancy, type of intervention used, complications, and outcomes (feeding, length of stay, and airway status) during the first year of life. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 55 (87%) had cleft palate and 17 (27%) were syndromic. Forty-eight (76%) patients were managed by prone positioning. Of the 15 surgically managed patients, the initial procedure was floor of mouth release in 7, mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO) in 4, and tongue-lip adhesion in 4. Five patients with coexisting airway morbidity needed a second surgery; 2 had MDO and 3 tracheostomies (one patient was later decannulated). Seven (47%) of the surgically managed patients required a gastrostomy tube. CONCLUSION: At present, there is no consensus on neonatal airway management in infants with PRS. From our review of 63 patients with PRS, we hereby propose a simple 4-point classification system and treatment algorithm, based on clinical features.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".