Trial reportMedical gas research
Evaluation of audible leak
Trial report in Medical gas research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of esophageal device insertion on cuff pressure of endotracheal tube: a literature review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis to Identify the Immunocytochemical Markers Effective in Delineating Benign from Malignant Thyroid Lesions in FNAC Samples.Endocrine pathology · 2022Pooled it
- Assessment of pressure-volume loop, inflation to precise pressure, minimum occlusive volume, and manual palpation techniques for inflation of endotracheal tube cuff: A randomised clinical study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Comparison between microcuff and wire-reinforced endotracheal tubes on postoperative complications in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A randomised study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Influence of positive end-expiratory pressure on arterial blood pressure in mechanically ventilated trauma patients in the field: a retrospective cohort study.Medical gas researchArticle
- Endotracheal Tube Cuff Pressures in the Operating Room of a Pediatric Hospital: A Quality Improvement Initiative.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cuff pressure of endotracheal tube (ETT) must be high enough to seal the trachea, and must be low enough to allow adequate perfusion of tracheal mucosa. Compared with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) cuffed tubes, polyurethane cuffed tubes protect more efficiently. Different methods of ETT cuff pressure maintenance in practice have been reported. We planned to compare ETT cuff pressure using different techniques in PVC and polyurethane microcuff tubes in a prospective randomized study. Eighty surgical patients between 16-65 years belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III, scheduled for orotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia, were included. All enrolled patients were randomized into four groups (n = 20 per group), followed by corresponding treatments, including intubation by PVC ETT or polyurethane microcuff ETT and cuff inflation by auscultation of audible leak or pressure volume loop. Amount of air required to inflate cuff was more in polyurethrane tube as compared to polyvinyl tube. While comparing the two methods of cuff inflation, less volume of air was required in pressure volume loop method. We concluded that PVC cuff tube and polyurethane microcuff tube both are safe tubes used in adult patients. However, when inflated using same technique polyurethane microcuff tubes required larger volume to inflate cuff. Further, pressure generated in polyurethane microcuff tubes in much lower than PVC tubes. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Pt B D Sharma, PGIMS, Rohtak (No. IEC/Th/18/Anst15) on January 20, 2018 and registered with Clinical Trials Registry-India (registration No. CTRI/2019/01/017170) on January 18, 2019.
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.