Tracheo‐innominate fistula in children: A systematic review of literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Tracheo-innominate fistula (TIF) is a rare but fatal complication of tracheotomy. To date, there is a paucity of literature regarding pediatric TIFs. The objectives of this study were to conduct a systematic review of literature on pediatric TIF following tracheotomy and describe three demonstrative cases from our institutional experience. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and CINAHL. All studies with pediatric patients (under 18 years of age) who developed TIF following tracheotomy were included. RESULTS: Fifty-four publications met inclusion criteria, reporting on 77 cases. The most common indication for tracheotomy was prolonged intubation and the need for ventilatory support (38.6%), with neurological comorbidities being the most common indication (72.7%). The mean time to TIF was 395.7 days (95% confidence interval, 225.9-565.5). Fifty-four patients (70.1%) presented with massive hemorrhage, whereas 18 patients (23.3%) presented with a sentinel bleeding event. The most common diagnostic interventions were computed tomography scan with or without contrast and bronchoscopy (55.8%). A substantial number of patients did not have any investigations (41.6%). Surgical management occurred in 70.1% of patients. Mortality was 38.6% in reported cases with variable follow-up periods. CONCLUSION: TIF may occur in long-term tracheostomy-dependent children, contrary to the conventionally described 3-week postoperative period. The mortality may not be as high as previously reported with timely intervention. Our results are limited by inherent risks of bias. Further research including well-designed cohort studies are needed to guide an evidence-based approach to TIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 130:217-224, 2020.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".