Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus open tracheostomy--a prospective, randomized, controlled trial
- PMID: 14604310
Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus open tracheostomy--a prospective, randomized, controlled trial
Abstract
Background: Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy has gained popularity, but its superiority to open tracheostomy is unclear. The object of this study was to compare procedure time, complication, safety and cost-effect between the percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) and the conventional open tracheotomy (OT).
Methods: A prospective randomized clinic trial was conducted in a general Intensive Care Unit of an University-based hospital. Eighty-three consecutive patients who needed elective tracheostomies were selected for this study. PDT was performed using the Ciaglia method with OT as control group. Age, gender, operative data, complications and mortality were recorded for analysis.
Results: The procedure time was 22.0 +/- 12.1 minutes in PDT group, and 41.5 +/- 5.9 minutes in OT group, with significant statistical difference (p < 0.001). The incidences of complications were not different between both groups. Ages, gender or days of pre-tracheostomy intubation showed no difference between two groups.
Conclusions: The PDT appears to be a simple, safe and time-saving bedside procedure. It can be recommended when an elective tracheostomy is needed in a critical patient.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of safety and cost of percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy.Am Surg. 2001 Jan;67(1):54-60. Am Surg. 2001. PMID: 11206898
-
Open versus percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy: efficacy and cost analysis.Am Surg. 2001 Apr;67(4):297-301; discussion 301-2. Am Surg. 2001. PMID: 11307993
-
Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. A safe, cost-effective bedside procedure.Arch Surg. 1996 Mar;131(3):265-71. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1996.01430150043008. Arch Surg. 1996. PMID: 8611091
-
Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy: a prospective evaluation of 500 consecutive cases.Laryngoscope. 2005 Oct;115(10 Pt 2):1-30. doi: 10.1097/01.MLG.0000163744.89688.E8. Laryngoscope. 2005. PMID: 16227862 Review.
-
Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy: report of 356 cases.J Trauma. 1996 Aug;41(2):238-43; discussion 243-4. doi: 10.1097/00005373-199608000-00007. J Trauma. 1996. PMID: 8760530 Review.
Cited by
-
Tracheostomy in Adult Intensive Care Unit: An ISCCM Expert Panel Practice Recommendations.Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020 Jan;24(Suppl 1):S31-S42. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-G23184. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2020. PMID: 32205955 Free PMC article.
-
Percutaneous versus surgical strategy for tracheostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative and postoperative complications.Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2018 Mar;403(2):137-149. doi: 10.1007/s00423-017-1648-8. Epub 2017 Dec 27. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2018. PMID: 29282535
-
Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 20;7(7):CD008045. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008045.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27437615 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical review: percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy.Crit Care. 2006 Feb;10(1):202. doi: 10.1186/cc3900. Crit Care. 2006. PMID: 16356203 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A Network Comparative Meta-analysis of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomies Using Anatomic Landmarks, Bronchoscopic, and Ultrasound Guidance Versus Open Surgical Tracheostomy.Lung. 2019 Jun;197(3):267-275. doi: 10.1007/s00408-019-00230-7. Epub 2019 Apr 24. Lung. 2019. PMID: 31020401 Review.