Percutaneous dilation tracheostomy versus surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients

This study was done to compare surgical tracheostomy and percutaneous dilation tracheostomy in respect to their early postoperative complications in critically ill patients. At a university hospital general intensive care unit, we studied 109 critically ill patients who underwent either elective sur...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bratislava Medical Journal 2012, Vol.113 (7), p.409-411
Hauptverfasser: Pauliny, M, Christova, E, Mackova, J, Liska, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study was done to compare surgical tracheostomy and percutaneous dilation tracheostomy in respect to their early postoperative complications in critically ill patients. At a university hospital general intensive care unit, we studied 109 critically ill patients who underwent either elective surgical tracheostomy (n=63) or percutaneous dilation tracheostomy (n=46). The number and type of complications during operation and early postoperative period were recorded and compared. When comparing the perioperative period of surgical versus percutaneous dilation tracheostomy, we recorded 2 vs 0 complications (NS difference).Average durations of postoperative observation (time until decannulation, release or death) were 16.04 and 16.09 days in group 1 and group 2, respectively; the difference in time was insignificant. When comparing the surgical versus percutaneous groups we have found no significant difference in postoperative complications in respect of bleeding and leakage through the space between the cannula and the stoma (bleeding 2 (3.2 %) vs 3 (6.5 %), NS; leakage 6 (9.5 %) vs 4 (8.7 %), NS). A significant difference was found in infectious complications and disintegration of tracheostomy (inflammation 17 (27 %) vs 0 (0 %), p
ISSN:0006-9248
1336-0345
1336-0345
DOI:10.4149/BLL_2012_092