An evaluation of a new percutaneous tracheostomy kit

Caldicott, L. D.; Oldroyd, G. J.; Bodenham, Andrew

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2044.1995.tb04514.x

Cited by 39 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[1718] and the risk of subsequent stenosis[19]. However, the strength and experience of the operator may also influence the formation of tracheal stoma[8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous dilatational versus conventional surgical tracheostomy in intensive care patients

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Tracheostomy is usually performed in patients with difficult weaning from mechanical ventilation or some catastrophic neurologic insult. Conventional tracheostomy involves dissection of the pretracheal tissues and insertion of the tracheostomy tube into the trachea under direct vision. Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is increasingly popular and has gained widespread acceptance in many intensive care unit and trauma centers.Aim:Aim of the study was to compare percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus conventional tracheostomy in intensive care patients.Patients and Methods:64 critically ill patients admitted to intensive care unit subjected to tracheostomy and randomly divided into two groups; percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy and conventional tracheostomy.Results:Mean duration of the procedure was similar between the two procedures while the mean size of tracheostomy tube was smaller in percutaneous technique. In addition, the Lowest SpO2 during procedure, PaCO2 after operation and intra-operative bleeding for both groups were nearly similar without any statistically difference. Postoperative infection after 7 days seen to be statistically lowered and the length of scar tend to be smaller among PDT patients.Conclusion:PDT technique is effective and safe as CST with low incidence of post operative complication.

show abstract

“…[1718] and the risk of subsequent stenosis[19]. However, the strength and experience of the operator may also influence the formation of tracheal stoma[8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous dilatational versus conventional surgical tracheostomy in intensive care patients

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A commercial kit is available and has also proved to be a rapid and acceptable method for performing percutaneous tracheostomy [12].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous tracheostomy by forceps dilation: report of 162 cases

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA prospective, observational clinical study evaluated the safety of percutaneous single-step dilational tracheostomy over a 43-month period. One hundred and sixty-two patients were deemed suitable for the procedure. The mean duration of tracheal intubation prior to tracheostomy was 6 days. The mean duration of the procedure was 9.3 min. Intra-operative complications occurred in 27 patients (16.6%), most of which were minor technical dif®culties without morbidity. Postoperative complications, some of which were associated with morbidity, occurred in 16 patients. There were two deaths secondary to premature decannulation, one case of severe bleeding and ®ve pneumothoraces. Long-term complications were assessed in 81 patients; there were four tracheal stenoses requiring surgery or laser therapy and seven patients with granulation tissue at the stoma site which did not require treatment. Forceps dilatational percutaneous tracheostomy appeared to be a convenient bedside procedure. However, complications do occur and further studies should address late sequellae, such as tracheal stenosis.

show abstract

“…Its complication rate is low and comparable with the percutaneous dilatational technique [80,[207][208][209].…”

Section: Percutaneous Tracheotomy: Other Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 96%