Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A low-volume, low-pressure tracheal tube cuff reduces pulmonary aspiration*

Young, Peter J., Pakeerathan, Sivarajasingham, Blunt, Mark C., Subramanya, Sriharsha·2006·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Leakage of fluid from the subglottic space to the lungs occurs along the longitudinal folds within the wall of an inflated high-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) cuff. The low-volume, low-pressure (LVLP) cuff does not have these folds yet allows for convenient and reliable control of tracheal wall pressure. Pulmonary aspiration during anesthesia has been linked with postoperative pneumonia and during critical illness causes ventilator-associated pneumonia. DESIGN: Prospective, blinded, randomized controlled trial; prospective observational study; and benchtop models. SETTING: Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Queen Elizabeth Hospital. PATIENTS: Anesthetized patients (n=38) and critically ill patients with either an LVLP or HVLP cuffed tracheostomy tube following swallow assessments (n=67). INTERVENTIONS: The LVLP cuff was compared with HVLP cuffs for leakage of dye placed in the subglottic space to the tracheobronchial tree in a rigid tracheal model and a benchtop pig trachea model (before and after a standardized cuff movement). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the rigid tracheal model, the incidence of leakage was 0% in the LVLP group and 100% in the HVLP group (p<.01). Dye leakage in the pig tracheal model with HVLP cuffs was 44% before tube movement, increasing to 79% afterward. The LVLP cuff did not leak in the pig tracheal model. Dye leakage in anesthetized patients was 0% before movement and 5% after in the LVLP group and in the HVLP group 22% increasing to 67% after movement (p<.001). Forty-nine percent of swallow assessments were scored as failed in the critical care patients with HVLP tracheostomy tube cuffs, and there were no episodes of aspiration following swallow assessment in the LVLP group (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The LVLP cuffed tracheal and tracheostomy tubes reduced pulmonary aspiration in the benchtop models and in anesthetized and critically ill patients. The single failure of the LVLP cuff in the anesthesia group was probably associated with accidental endobronchial intubation following tube movement.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.ccm.0000201406.57821.5b

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 296

Metadata

Authors
Young, P. J., Pakeerathan, S., Blunt, M. C., & Subramanya, S.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2006-03
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
632-639
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1970170506
Cited by
296
References
25
FWCI
74.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A low-volume, low-pressure tracheal tube cuff reduces pulmonary aspiration*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.ccm.0000201406.57821.5b
The paper
Young, P. J., Pakeerathan, S., Blunt, M. C., & Subramanya, S. (2006). A low-volume, low-pressure tracheal tube cuff reduces pulmonary aspiration*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000201406.57821.5b

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.