ArticleThe Laryngoscope2018
Investigating the effects of laryngotracheal stenosis on upper airway aerodynamics.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of numerical simulation of upper airway flow field in pediatric obstructive sleep apnea with adenoid hypertrophy.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Effects of 3D Airway Geometry on the Airflow of Adults with Cleft Lip and Palate and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Functional Imaging Study.Sleep science (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2023Article
- Airway Resistance and Respiratory Distress in Laryngeal Cancer: A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study.The Laryngoscope · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Tracheal Stenosis Effects on Airway Resistance and Work of Breathing Using Computational Fluid Dynamics.Tanaffos · 2023Article
- Comparison of Inhaled Drug Delivery in Patients With One- and Two-level Laryngotracheal Stenosis.The Laryngoscope · 2023Article
- A computational analysis on the impact of multilevel laryngotracheal stenosis on airflow and drug particle dynamics in the upper airway.Experimental and computational multiphase flow · 2023Article
- Molecular Mechanisms and Physiological Changes behind Benign Tracheal and Subglottic Stenosis in Adults.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- A systematic analysis of surgical interventions for the airway in the mature unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity: a single case study.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2022Article
- Orally Inhaled Drug Particle Transport in Computerized Models of Laryngotracheal Stenosis.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2021Article
- The effect of airway motion and breathing phase during imaging on CFD simulations of respiratory airflow.Computers in biology and medicine · 2020Article
- Helium-Oxygen Mixture Model for Particle Transport in CT-Based Upper Airways.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Impact of gastroesophageal reflux in the pathogenesis of tracheal stenosis.Translational cancer research · 2020Review
- A Review of Respiratory Anatomical Development, Air Flow Characterization and Particle Deposition.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Review
- The Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics in the Evaluation of Laryngotracheal Pathology.The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2019Article
- Computational Analysis of the Mature Unilateral Cleft Lip Nasal Deformity on Nasal Patency.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveVery little is known about the impact of laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) on inspiratory airflow and resistance, especially in air hunger states. This study investigates the effect of LTS on airway resistance and volumetric flow across three different inspiratory pressures.
methodsHead-and-neck computed tomography scans of 11 subjects from 2010 to 2016 were collected. Three-dimensional reconstructions of the upper airway from the nostrils to carina, including the oral cavity, were created for one subject with a normal airway and for 10 patients with LTS. Airflow simulations were conducted using computational fluid dynamics modeling at three different inspiratory pressures (10, 25, 40 pascals [Pa]) for all subjects under two scenarios: 1) inspiration through nostrils only (MC), and 2) through both nostrils and mouth (MO).
resultsVolumetric flows in the normal subject at the three inspiratory pressures were considerably higher (MC: 11.8-26.1 L/min; MO: 17.2-36.9 L/min) compared to those in LTS (MC: 2.86-6.75 L/min; MO: 4.11-9.00 L/min). Airway resistances in the normal subject were 0.051 to 0.092 pascal seconds per milliliter (Pa.s)/mL (MC) and 0.035-0.065 Pa.s/mL (MO), which were approximately tenfold lower than those of subjects with LTS: 0.39 to 0.89 Pa.s/mL (MC) and 0.45 to 0.84 Pa.s/mL (MO). Furthermore, subjects with glottic stenosis had the greatest resistance, whereas subjects with subglottic stenosis had the greatest variability in resistance. Subjects with tracheal stenosis had the lowest resistance.
conclusionThis pilot study demonstrates that LTS increases resistance and decreases airflow. Mouth breathing significantly improved airflow and resistance but cannot completely compensate for the effects of stenosis. Furthermore, location of stenosis appears to modulate the effect of the stenosis on resistance differentially. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 128:E141-E149, 2018.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.