Percutaneous Tracheostomy versus Surgical Tracheostomy

Author(s):  
Arturo Guarino ◽  
Guido Merli
2007 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 472-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takashi Hirano ◽  
Naoki Uemura ◽  
Tetsuo Watanabe ◽  
Masashi Suzuki

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Pramesh S Shrestha ◽  
Moda N Marhatta ◽  
Subhash P Acharya ◽  
Ninadini Shrestha

Introduction: Tracheostomy is one of the frequent surgical procedure carried out in intensive care unit. Percutaneous tracheostomy is becoming increasingly popular compared to conventional open surgical tracheostomy in ICU. Methods: A prospective randomized trial with twenty patients in each group was conducted to compare the outcomes of percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy. Percutaneous tracheostomy was performed using Ciaglia Blue Rhino technique and surgical tracheostomy was performed using established technique. The outcomes were compared in relation to randomization to tracheostomy, completion of procedure, intra operative and post-operative complications, hospital length of stay and cost. Results: There were no major complications in either group. Most variables studied were not statistically significant. The two groups did not differ in terms of basic demographics or APACHE II score. The only variables to reach statistical significance were time duration from tracheostomy randomization to start of procedure and time taken for completion of procedure. It was mean 31.85±15.35 hours in Percutaneous Tracheostomy group and in Surgical Tracheostomy group it was mean 49.10±23.61 hours respectively (p<0.009). Time taken to perform percutaneous tracheostomy was mean 15.50±3.22 minutes and for surgical tracheostomy it was mean 20.30±3.38 minutes. (p<0.001). Conclusion: Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is simple, faster to perform and can be done at bedside to avoid considerable delay in the performance of open tracheostomy where there is high demand for elective and emergency procedures in operating room.  


2002 ◽  
Vol 116 (12) ◽  
pp. 1025-1027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manoj Kumar ◽  
Ali Jaffery ◽  
Mathew Jones

Percutaneous tracheostomy is a procedure frequently carried out in a critical care setting. It is performed in the majority of cases by anaesthetists in the United Kingdom. The ENT surgeon is only called in situations where it is deemed by the intensivist that percutanous tracheostomy would prove too great a risk. In this situation the patient was taken to the operating theatre for a surgical tracheostomy. In our paper, a retrospective analysis was performed of all percutaneous tracheostomies carried out by ENT surgeons in the Royal Glamorgan Hospital, during a two-year period from July 1999 to July 2001, to assess whether percutaneous tracheostomy is a feasible option as a first line procedure in all elective tracheostomies. Thirty-six patients were included in the study. The mean age was 60.2 years. Haemorrhage was noted to be a problem in only one patient and two patients developed post-operative wound infection that was treated with systemic antibiotics. No other complications were encountered. We propose that all ENT surgeons should be trained in performing percutaneous tracheostomy and that it should be used as the gold standard in elective tracheostomy insertion. In cases where difficulties are likely to be anticipated, percutaneous tracheostomy can still be considered as the first option. This can be performed in the operating theatre setting with the knowledge that if any complication should occur then conversion to surgical tracheostomy can be done without delay.


CHEST Journal ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 127 (3) ◽  
pp. 879-885 ◽  
Author(s):  
Govindan Raghuraman ◽  
Sunil Rajan ◽  
Joseph Khalil Marzouk ◽  
Dam Mullhi ◽  
Fang G Smith

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document