ArticleTanaffos2015
Tracheal Stenosis and Cuff Pressure: Comparison of Minimal Occlusive Volume and Palpation Techniques.
Article in Tanaffos, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the effectiveness of topical dexamethasone emollient, lidocaine gel, and glycerin emollient on the endotracheal tube for postoperative hoarseness of voice, sore throat, and laryngospasm.Journal of medicine and life · 2023Trial
- Size Matters: Endotracheal Tube Sizes and Glottic Stenosis Familiarity Among Intubating Physicians.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Relationship between difference in endotracheal tube cuff area and airway area with minimum cuff pressure for adequate airway sealing: a prospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Risk factor evaluation of cuff pressure of >30 cmHNursing open · 2024Observational
- Use of Silicon T-Tube for Subglottic Stenosis and Tracheal Stenosis.Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2023Article
- Methods Used for Endotracheal Tube Cuff Inflation and Pressure Verification in Veterinary Medicine: A Questionnaire on Current Practice.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Passive Release Technique Produces the Most Accurate Endotracheal Tube Cuff Pressure Than Manual Palpation and Minimum Occlusive Volume Technique in the Absence of Manometer.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2021Article
- A canine model of tracheal stenosis induced by cuffed endotracheal intubation.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Use of dedicated optical tracheal dilator for postintubation tracheal stenosis: First report from India.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTracheal stenosis, which has received more emphasis recently, is a common post intubation complication and may develop due to different reasons. One important reason is the endotracheal tube cuff pressure. Therefore, this study sought to examine the accuracy of diagnostic test for palpation and minimal occlusive volume techniques to measure the endotracheal tube cuff pressure. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this cross sectional study, the accuracy of diagnostic tests for palpation and minimal occlusive volume techniques to measure the endotracheal tube cuff pressure was assessed in 101 patients aged over 18 years who had undergone open heart surgery and post-surgical mechanical ventilation in the ICU.
resultsIn the palpation technique, the cuff pressure of 27 patients (26.7%) was reported to be out of the permissible range and for the rest of them (74 patients, 73.3%) it was within the permissible range. Then, the cuff pressure was checked by the standard method using a manometer and after comparing the results it was found that the cuff pressure of 92 patients (91.1%) was not in the permissible range and only nine patients (8.9%) had a cuff pressure within the permissible range (20-30 cm H2O). In minimal occlusive volume method compared with the standard method, 22 patients (21.7%) had cuff pressure within the permissible range of 20-30 cm H2O, and 79 of them (78.2%) had cuff pressure out of the permissible range and higher than the upper limit.
conclusionThis study recommends that the best way to measure the endotracheal tube cuff pressure is to use a cuff manometer, and when it is not available, the minimal occlusive volume would be a better alternative compared to the palpation technique to keep the cuff pressure within a proper range to avoid tracheotomy complications such as tracheal stenosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27114727PMC4841992W2466923633What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.