Tracheal tube size in adults undergoing elective surgery – a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tracheal tubes are routinely used in adults undergoing elective surgery. The size of the tracheal tube, defined by its internal diameter, is often generically selected according to sex, with 7-7.5 mm and 8-8.5 mm tubes recommended in women and men, respectively. Tracheal diameter in adults is highly variable, being narrowest at the subglottis, and is affected by height and sex. The outer diameter of routinely used tracheal tubes may exceed these dimensions, traumatise the airway and increase the risk of postoperative sore throat and hoarseness. These complications disproportionately affect women and may be mitigated by using smaller tracheal tubes (6-6.5 mm). Patient safety concerns about using small tracheal tubes are based on critical care populations undergoing prolonged periods of tracheal intubation and not patients undergoing elective surgery. The internal diameter of the tube corresponds to its clinical utility. Tracheal tubes as small as 6.0 mm will accommodate routinely used intubation aids, suction devices and slim-line fibreoptic bronchoscopes. Positive pressure ventilation may be performed without increasing the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury or air trapping, even when high minute volumes are required. There is also no demonstrable increased risk of aspiration or cuff pressure damage when using smaller tracheal tubes. Small tracheal tubes may not be safe in all patients, such as those with high secretion loads and airflow limitation. A balanced view of risks and benefits should be taken appropriate to the clinical context, to select the smallest tracheal tube that permits safe peri-operative management.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".