Airway Complications in Intubated Versus Laryngeal Mask Airway–Managed Dentistry: A Meta-Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Serious airway complications can occur with inadequate airway management during general anesthesia (GA). This meta-analysis investigated randomized controlled trials that compared perioperative technique failures and airway complications, including hypoxia, during GA for dentistry using endotracheal intubation or a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) for airway management. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases and gray literature was completed. Independent reviewers assessed eligibility, performed data extraction, completed risk of bias assessment, and judged the quality of results through Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Risk ratios (RRs) for airway complications, with 95% CIs, were calculated. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. Sensitivity and age-subgroup analyses were explored. RESULTS: Six trials were deemed eligible from a total of 9076 identified reports. The airway management intervention for these trials was LMA. Technique failures or effect differences in airway complications were not detected except for postoperative hypoxia, where LMA use had a decreased risk (RR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-0.77; I2 = 0%; moderate quality). A similar effect was seen in the pediatric analysis (RR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.01-0.84; I2 = 0%; moderate quality). Additionally, LMA use reduced pediatric sore throat risk (RR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.04-0.15; I2 = 0%; moderate quality). CONCLUSION: Use of an LMA in dentistry may have the potential to reduce the risk of postoperative hypoxia, particularly in pediatric patients, although further study is required.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it