Observational studyEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2025
Post-intubation laryngeal injuries: incidence, types, and outcomes in a tertiary setup.
Observational study in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of an Explainable Machine Learning Model for Identification of Dysphagia in Patients with COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026Article
- Effect of deep analgosedation vs. intubated general anesthesia on perioperative sedation-related adverse events in older adults undergoing ERCP: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndotracheal intubation is a routine yet critical procedure during general anesthesia that can cause a spectrum of laryngeal injuries, potentially affecting vocal function and airway integrity. The route of intubation, oral versus nasal, may influence the incidence and severity of such injuries, but evidence is inconclusive.
objectiveThis study aims to prospectively compare the incidence, severity, and clinical impact of laryngeal injuries following oral and nasal intubation in adult patients undergoing elective surgeries under general anesthesia.
methodsA prospective observational study was conducted involving 67 patients scheduled for elective surgery with endotracheal intubation. Patients were allocated into oral (n = 35) and nasal (n = 32) intubation groups based on surgical requirements. Flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy was performed within six hours of extubation to evaluate laryngeal injuries, graded using the Eckerbom classification. Hoarseness severity was assessed and recorded. Statistical analysis including chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of injury and compared groups, with significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe incidence and severity of laryngeal injuries did not significantly differ between oral and nasal intubation groups (p = 0.67). Grade 0 injury (no visible abnormality) was predominant (oral 65.7%, nasal 71.9%). Hoarseness severity distribution was also comparable (p = 0.78). Multivariate analysis revealed no significant association between injury occurrence and variables including tube size, duration of intubation, or number of intubation attempts.
conclusionOral and nasal routes of endotracheal intubation demonstrated comparable rates and severity of post-intubation laryngeal injuries in this cohort. Skilled intubation technique remains paramount to minimizing complications regardless of route.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40802098What 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.