ArticleScientific reports2023
A new formula to predict the size and insertion depth of cuffed nasotracheal tube in children receiving dental surgery: a retrospective study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adjunctive Maneuvers for Glottic Entry During Pediatric Nasotracheal Intubation: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Length and Shape of Various Preformed Nasotracheal Tubes.Anesthesia progress · 2025Article
- Nasotracheal intubation in pediatrics: a narrative review.Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This retrospective study aimed to develop a new formula for selecting the appropriate size and determining the depth of the cuffed nasotracheal intubation (NTI) for a cuffed endotracheal tube (cETT) in pediatric patients undergoing dental surgery. In addition, the clinical data on cETT (i.e., the size and depth of insertion) was compared with those calculated with age-based formulas to evaluate their correlation. A total number of 684 patients who received NTI were enrolled (healthy group, n = 607; special-need group, n = 77). The ETT size used in real-world scenarios was smaller (i.e., about 0.5 and 0.94 mm) than the age-based formula, while the ETT depth was greater (i.e., about 1.5 cm) than the age-based formula in both groups. In the healthy group, age, gender, and body weight were identified as predictors of ETT size and depth through multiple linear regression analysis, while only age and body weight were predictors in the special-needs group. New formulas were developed based on these findings, with ETT size = 3.98 + 0.052 × age + 0.048 × gender (male = 1, female = 0) + 0.023 × body weight (kg) and ETT depth = 15.1 + 0.43 × age + 0.300 × gender (male = 1, female = 0) + 0.007 × body weight (kg). The new formula could be useful for both healthy and special-need pediatric populations undergoing dental procedures.
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.