A Network Comparative Meta-analysis of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomies Using Anatomic Landmarks, Bronchoscopic, and Ultrasound Guidance Versus Open Surgical Tracheostomy

Lung ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 197 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Imran H. Iftikhar ◽  
Stephanie Teng ◽  
Mathew Schimmel ◽  
Crystal Duran ◽  
Alejandro Sardi ◽  
...  
HNO ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Schuler ◽  
Jens Greve ◽  
Thomas K. Hoffmann ◽  
Janina Hahn ◽  
Felix Boehm ◽  
...  

Abstract Background One of the main symptoms of severe infection with the new coronavirus‑2 (SARS-CoV-2) is hypoxemic respiratory failure because of viral pneumonia with the need for mechanical ventilation. Prolonged mechanical ventilation may require a tracheostomy, but the increased risk for contamination is a matter of considerable debate. Objective Evaluation of safety and effects of surgical tracheostomy on ventilation parameters and outcome in patients with COVID-19. Study design Retrospective observational study between March 27 and May 18, 2020, in a single-center coronavirus disease-designated ICU at a tertiary care German hospital. Patients Patients with COVID-19 were treated with open surgical tracheostomy due to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Measurements Clinical and ventilation data were obtained from medical records in a retrospective manner. Results A total of 18 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV‑2 infection and surgical tracheostomy were analyzed. The age range was 42–87 years. All patients received open tracheostomy between 2–16 days after admission. Ventilation after tracheostomy was less invasive (reduction in PEAK and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]) and lung compliance increased over time after tracheostomy. Also, sedative drugs could be reduced, and patients had a reduced need of norepinephrine to maintain hemodynamic stability. Six of 18 patients died. All surgical staff were equipped with N99-masks and facial shields or with powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR). Conclusion Our data suggest that open surgical tracheostomy can be performed without severe complications in patients with COVID-19. Tracheostomy may reduce invasiveness of mechanical ventilation and the need for sedative drugs and norepinehprine. Recommendations for personal protective equipment (PPE) for surgical staff should be followed when PPE is available to avoid contamination of the personnel.


Resuscitation ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. e113-e114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Galinski ◽  
Jean Catineau ◽  
Karim Tazarourte ◽  
Nicole Dardel ◽  
Philippe Bertrand ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
Holly  Newton ◽  
Shadaba Ahmed

In this structured review, I aim to discuss the principle of tracheostomies including what they are and why we perform them. My main objective is to explore the literature surrounding whether or not there is a better option between open surgical and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy, based on the complications with which they are associated. Simply put, a tracheostomy is a common surgical procedure performed on critically ill patients in order to facilitate their breathing. I will discuss the two main types of tracheostomy: open surgical (OST) and percutaneous dilatational (PDT), along with their accompanying impediments. 


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. e000412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abiola Olowoyeye ◽  
Opeyemi Fadahunsi ◽  
Jerome Okudo ◽  
Oluwakare Opaneye ◽  
Charles Okwundu

ImportanceLumbar puncture (LP) failure rates vary and can be as high as 65%. Ultrasound guidance could increase the success of performing LP.ObjectiveTo summarise the evidence on the use of ultrasound guidance versus palpation method for LP.Data sourcesWe searched computerised databases and published indexes, registries and references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles without any language restrictions to find studies that compared ultrasound guidance to palpation method for performing an LP.Study selectionStudies were included if they were randomised or quasirandomised trials in neonates and infants that compared ultrasound guidance with palpation method for performing an LP.Data extraction and synthesisStandardised data collection tool was used for data extraction, and two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the studiesMain outcome(s) and measure(s)The primary outcome was the risk of LP failure, while the risk of traumatic tap, needle redirections/reinsertions and procedure durations were secondary outcomesResultsData from four studies and 308 participants is included in the analysis. Ultrasound imaging reduced the risk of LP failure, risk ratio of 0.58 (95% CI 0.15 to 2.28), but it was not statistically significant (p=0.44). Ultrasound imaging significantly reduced the risk of a traumatic tap risk ratio of 0.33 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.82) and p=0.02. The included studies had low to moderate quality; the studies differed based on mean age and with variability on outcome definition.Conclusions and relevanceThis meta-analysis suggests that ultrasound imaging has no effect in increasing lumbar success but is beneficial in reducing the risk of traumatic taps in neonates and infants.Trial registration numberCRD42017055800.


1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. A57
Author(s):  
Bradley D Freeman ◽  
Karen Isabella ◽  
Natatia Lin ◽  
Timothy G Buchman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document