ArticleCureus2025
Cuff Pressure in Pediatric Patients: From Monitoring to Clinical Practice.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMonitoring of endotracheal tube cuff pressure (Pcuff), although recommended, is not mandatory in daily anesthetic practice. An adequate Pcuff is essential to ensure adequate ventilation, prevent potential microaspirations, and avoid airway complications. The goal of this clinical audit was to evaluate Pcuff after anesthetic induction and at the end of the procedure in pediatric patients undergoing general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation.
methodsThis prospective audit included all pediatric patients (<18 years) who underwent endotracheal intubation for elective and urgent surgeries during one month. After anesthetic induction, Pcuff values were measured objectively using a portable and calibrated cuff manometer and adjusted to the reference range (20-30 cmH
resultsFifty patients were included, with five excluded due to the absence of Pcuff measurements at the start or end of the procedure. After anesthetic induction, 37.8% (n=17) of the 45 patients had Pcuff within the reference range, while 28.9% (n=13) had Pcuff below 20 cmH
conclusionMore than 50% of the patients presented an inadequate Pcuff after anesthetic induction as well as at the end of the procedure. This study highlights that the routine implementation of objective and quantitative Pcuff measurements after induction and during the procedure could help maintain normal Pcuff values during anesthesia, potentially reducing complications related to pressure changes.
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.