Challenge of tracheal extubation and tube exchange of a difficult airway: a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tracheal extubation is an integral part of airway management. Even though available data indicated that the incidence of complications immediately after tracheal extubation may be higher than during tracheal intubation, it is significantly underexplored in the scientific literature in comparison with tracheal intubation. Failure to re-secure the airway during or immediately after tracheal extubation may have fatal consequences. Closed claims analyses have highlighted the seriousness of adverse events occurring postextubation. Consequently, a well-planned strategy for tracheal extubation is as important as for the intubation and is correctly regarded as a logical extension of an intubation strategy. This narrative review focusses on the challenges of tracheal extubation and complications of routine and 'at-risk' extubation in adults. It provides the reader with a risk stratification before extubation. Guidelines for tracheal extubation including advanced techniques for tracheal extubation of patients 'at-risk' are followed by a detailed step-by-step approach for video-assisted tracheal tube exchange in patients with a difficult airway.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".