ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Comparative evaluation of three methods of endotracheal tube cuff inflation for adequacy of seal.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06107998 (Comparison of the Audible Leak-balloon Palpation Method and the Stethoscope-guided Method for Endotracheal Tube Cuff Inflation), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Comparison of the Audible Leak-balloon Palpation Method and the Stethoscope-guided Method for Endotracheal Tube Cuff Inflation
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Intubation with cuffed endotracheal tube (ETT) is common in operation rooms, critical care, and emergency rooms. The pressure exerted by the cuff on the tracheal mucosa can lead to a reduction in blood flow to the tracheal wall and result in mucosal ischemia. There are many methods for ETT cuff inflation. Aim of the study was to compare the cuff pressures and volumes between the three methods of ETT cuff inflation. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty patients were randomized into three groups: Group SG (stethescope guided), group AL (audible leak), and group P (palpation). In group SG, the cuff was inflated by auscultating with the bell of the stethoscope over the thyroid cartilage for leak around cuff. In group AL, the cuff was inflated by listening for an audible leak around the cuff with observer's ear 5 cm away from the mouth of the patient. In group P, the cuff was inflated by palpating for a leak over the cricoid and trachea. The adequacy of the cuff seal was compared between the groups by assessing the volumes of additional air needed to stop the leak around the cuff as confirmed by supraglottic capnometry. Results: The initial volumes needed to inflate the cuff were significantly more in the stethoscope (SG) and hearing (AL) groups than in the palpation (P) group (SG = 5.1 ± 1.4 ml, AL = 4.6 ± 1.6 ml, Conclusion: Out of the auscultation-guided, audible leak-guided, and palpation-guided methods of ETT cuff inflation, the auscultation-guided and audible leak-guided methods achieve significantly better tracheal seal than the palpation-guided method.
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.