Table 4.
Cuff leak cut off | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Author | Year | Volume (ml) | Percentage of tidal volumea | Outcome | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV |
Miller and Cole [27] | 1996 | 110 | PES | 0.67 | 0.99 | 0.80 | 0.98 | |
Jaber and colleagues[30] | 2003 | 130 | 12 | PES | 0.85 | 0.95 | 0.69 | 0.98 |
de Bast and colleagues [36] | 2002 | 15.5 | Reintubation | 0.75 | 0.72 | 0.25 | 0.96 | |
Sandhu and colleagues [26] | 2000 | 10.0 | PES or reintubation | 0.54 | 0.96 | 0.64 | 0.94 | |
Wang and colleagues [14] | 2007 | 88 | PES | 0.55 | 0.91 | |||
Maury and colleagues [25] | 2004 | 0 | PES | 1.00 | 0.80 | 0.15 | 1.00 | |
Chung and colleagues [55] | 2006 | 140 | Laryngeal edema | 0.89 | 0.90 | 0.84 | 0.93 | |
Engoren [56] | 1999 | 110 | PES | 0.00 | 0.96 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |
Kriner and colleagues [8] | 2005 | 110 | PES | 0.50 | 0.84 | 0.12 | 0.97 | |
Cheng and colleagues [3] | 2006 | 18.0 | PES | 0.85 | 0.72 | 0.21 | 0.98 |
NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value; PES, post-extubation stridor. aCuff leak volume as a percentage of inspiratory or expiratory tidal volume.