Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy Research Articles

Retrospective Comparison of Percutaneous Forceps Dilatation Tracheostomy and Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy

Retrospective Comparison of Percutaneous Forceps Dilatation Tracheostomy and Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy
 INTRODUCTION AND AIM: We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the early complications of conventional surgical and percutaneous forceps dilatation tracheostomies in ICU patients. MATERIAL and METHODS: Electronic records of ICU patients hospitalized in our unit between 2019 and 2022 were retrospectively scanned. Demographic data, the tracheostomy tecnique and early complications related to the procedure were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients underwent a tracheostomy in our ICU. 34 (53.2%) patients underwent conventional surgical tracheostomy (CST) and 30 (46.8 %) patients underwent percutaneous forceps dilatation tracheostomy (PFDT). The mean age of the patients was 73.30±14.45 y, and 29 (45.31%) patients were male. The mean length of intubation before the procedure was 19.36±7.76 days, it was significantly longer in the CST group (21.74±9.34 days) compared to the PFDT group (16.67±7.31 days) (p=0.02).Early complications occured in 7 patients (20.58%) in the CST, and in 5 patients (16.66%) in the PFDT group. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: We believe that in carefully selected and prepared patients, the rate of early complications of PFDT is similar to CST when it is applied by experienced physicians. KEYWORDS: intensive care, percutaneous tracheostomy, complications

Comparative Study of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy and Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Adult Patients.

The present study was aimed to compare percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) with that of conventional surgical tracheostomy (ST) in critically ill adult patients requiring tracheostomy for respiratory management. For this purpose 32 critically ill patients, admitted to the ICU between July 2016 and June 2018, were subjected to tracheostomy and randomly divided into two groups (PDT and ST) of 16 patients each. Mean duration of intubation was similar between the two procedures while the mean size of the tracheostomy tube was smaller in percutaneous technique. In comparison, post-operative infection after 7days seem to be statistically lowered and the length of scar tend to be smaller in PDT patients. Although early and late post-operative complication rates are not statistically significant in the PDT groups, yet investigations of the long-term outcome following PDT are, therefore, necessary. Generally, PDT has lower acute complications than ST, although this may vary by the specific PDT technique. Patient factor may also influence complications. In view of the benefit versus risks in tracheostomy, PDT may be considered the "procedure of choice" for performing elective tracheostomies in critically ill adult patients.

The Feasibility of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy in Immunosuppressed ICU Patients with or without Thrombocytopenia.

Background Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) has become the preferred method in several intensive care units (ICUs), but data on PDT performed in immunosuppressed and thrombocytopenic patients are scarce. This study aimed to analyze the feasibility of PDT in immunosuppressed and thrombocytopenic patients compared to conventional open surgical tracheostomy (OST). Methods We retrospectively analyzed the charts of patients who underwent PDT or OST between May 2017 and November 2020. Our outcomes were stoma site infections and bleeding complications. Results 63 patients underwent PDT, and 21 patients underwent OST. Distribution of gender ratio, age, SAPS II, time of ventilation before tracheostomy, and preexisting hematooncological diseases was comparable between the two groups. After allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT), patients were more likely to undergo PDT than OST (p=0.033). The PDT cohort suffered from mucositis more frequently (p=0.043). There were no significant differences in leucocyte or platelet count on the tracheostomy day. Patients with coagulation disorders and patients under immunosuppression were distributed equally among both groups. Stoma site infection was documented in five cases in PDT and eight cases in the OST group. Moderate infections were remarkably increased in the OST group. Smears were positive in six cases in the PDT group; none of these patients had local infection signs. In the OST group, smears were positive in four cases; all had signs of a stroma site infection. Postprocedural bleedings occurred in eight cases (9.5%) and were observed significantly more often in the OST group (p=0.001), leading to emergency surgery in one case of the OST group. Conclusion PDT is a feasible and safe procedure in a predominantly immunosuppressed and thrombocytopenic patient cohort without an increased risk for stoma site infections or bleeding complications.

Tracheostomy with aortic debranching: a case report

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is preferred over conventional surgical tracheostomy for prolonged airway protection and mechanical ventilation. However, despite its advantages, severe PDT-related complications have been reported, including catastrophic hemorrhage from common carotid artery laceration and innominate artery pseudo-aneurysm. PDT can typically be applied to the trachea, which is the focal point for the transverse course of great vessels (e.g., the anomalous brachiocephalic trunk, which overlaps with the targeted lesion anteriorly); therefore, to improve patient outcomes, an alternative method using aortic debranching may be considered.

Comparison of Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy and Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy in the Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit.

Tracheostomy is a necessary procedure for patients admitted to the neurosurgery intensive care unit (ICU) with severe brain injury, because mechanical ventilation must be maintained for a long time following neurologic failure. The purpose of this study was to compare conventional surgical tracheostomy (CST) and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) performed at the bedside in critically ill neurosurgery patients requiring tracheostomy to determine which procedure has comparative advantages. This retprospective study was conducted between January 2019 and December 2020. PDT was performed on 52 patients and CST was performed on 44 patients. The baseline characteristics, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes were recorded. The mean operative time in the CST group was 25.5±6.5 minutes and that in the PDT group was 15.1±2.5 minutes; the difference was statistically significant (p<0.01). Four patients in the CST group and none in the PDT group experienced bleeding requiring transfusion. However, there was no significant difference in total ICU mortality or length of hospital stay. There were no statistical differences in the individual complication categories between the 2 study groups. There were fewer procedure-induced complications among patients receiving PDT than among those receiving CST. In addition, the treatment time for PDT was shorter than that for CST treatment.

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy compared with conventional surgical tracheostomy in neurosurgery intensive care unit

Background: Tracheostomy is a commonly performed procedure in intensive care units (ICU). Percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy (PDT) has achieved wide acceptance recently since its first introduction by Ciagila in 1985.&#x0D; Aims and Objective: The current study was designed and aimed to compare conventional tracheostomy (CT) with percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy using Grigg’s GWDF technique in terms of operative timing, duration of ICU and hospital stay and complications.&#x0D; Materials and Methods: A prospective, single blinded, randomized study was done in between April 2019 to December 2019. Patients were randomly assigned into CT group and PDT group of 32 patients in each group. Data were recorded in terms of demographics, preoperative diagnosis, GCS, comorbidities, ICU stay, hospital stay, decanulation time, operative time and various complications. Data were compared using student’s t test for continuous variables and Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS statistics version 20.&#x0D; Results: Mean operative time in CT group was 35.00±9.56 min and in PDT group was 18.17±8.78 min and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.00). Similarly, there was statistically significant difference in overall complications in between conventional and percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy group. However, there was no significant difference in terms of total ICU stay, hospital stay and tracheostomy decanulation time in between these group. There was no statistical difference in between individual category of complications in between the two study groups.&#x0D; Conclusion: Percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy is equally safe and effective as conventional tracheostomy but with lower incidence of overall complications and faster to perform.

"Hybrid tracheostomy": alow risk procedure for tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients

HintergrundDie Tracheostomie bei invasiv beatmeten Patienten mit Coronavirus-Erkrankung 2019 (COVID-19) bedeutet ein erhöhtes Expositionsrisiko mit virushaltigem Aerosol für das Personal.ZielsetzungEvaluation eines risikoreduzierten Verfahrens zur Tracheostomie.MethodePräsentiert wird mit der „Hybridtracheostomie“ eine Methode, welche die Vorteile der konventionell chirurgischen und der perkutan dilatativen Methode vereint.ErgebnisseSechs Patienten wurden mit der Hybridmethode komplikationslos tracheostomiert.SchlussfolgerungDie „Hybridtracheostomie“ ist ein sicheres minimal-invasives Verfahren mit geringem Risiko für eine Exposition mit virushaltigem Aerosol.

Severe pain-related adverse events of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy performed by a neurointensivist compared with conventional surgical tracheostomy in neurocritically ill patients

BackgroundWe evaluated severe pain-related adverse events (SAE) during the percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) procedure performed by a neurointensivist and compared the outcomes with that of conventional surgical tracheostomy in neurocritically ill patients.MethodsThis was a retrospective and observational study of adult patients who were admitted to the neurosurgical intensive care unit between January 2014 and March 2018 and underwent tracheostomy. In this study, primary endpoints were incidence of SAE: cardiac arrest, arrhythmias, hypertension, hypotension, desaturation, bradypnea, or ventilatory distress. The secondary endpoint was procedure-induced complications.ResultsA total of 156 patients underwent tracheostomy during the study. Elective surgery of brain tumors (34.0%) and intracranial hemorrhage (20.5%) were the most common reasons for admission. The most common reasons for tracheostomy were difficult ventilator weaning or prolonged intubation (42.9%) and sedative reduction (23.7%). Tachycardia (30.1%) and hypertension (30.1%) were the most common SAE. Incidence of SAE was more common in conventional tracheostomy compared to PDT (67.1% vs. 42.3%, P = 0.002). The total duration of SAE (19.8 ± 23.0 min vs. 3.4 ± 5.3 min, P < 0.001) and procedural time (42.2 ± 21.8 min vs. 17.7 ± 9.2 min, P < 0.001) were longer in conventional tracheostomy compared to PDT. Multivariable adjustment revealed that only PDT by a neurointensivist significantly reduced the incidence of SAE by one third (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.187–0.691). In addition, PDT by a neurointensivist deceased the duration of SAE by 8.64 min (β: -8.64, 95% CI: − 15.070 – -2.205, P = 0.009) and prolonging the procedure time by every one minute significantly increased the duration of SAE by 6.38 min (β: 6.38, 95% CI: 0.166–0.470, P < 0.001). Procedure-induced complications were more common in conventional tracheostomy compared to PDT (23.5% vs. 11.3%, P = 0.047).ConclusionsThis retrospective and exploratory study of our single-center limited cohort of tracheostomy patients revealed that decreased SAE may be associated with short procedural time during the PDT procedure performed by a neurointensivist. It is proposed that PDT by a neurointensivist may be safe and feasible in neurocritically ill patients.

Safety and Feasibility of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy Performed by a Neurointensivist Compared with Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy in Neurosurgery Intensive Care Unit

Safety and Feasibility of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy Performed by a Neurointensivist Compared with Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy in Neurosurgery Intensive Care Unit

Comparison of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy with Open Tracheostomy in Intensive Care Unit

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.&#x0D; 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.&#x0D; 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&lt;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&lt;0.001).&#x0D; 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.

Comparison of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy with Open Tracheostomy in Intensive Care Unit

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&lt;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&lt;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.

Current research trends comparing percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy and conventional surgical tracheostomy: a systematic review

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;A review of research trends, followed in tracheostomy studies, are discussed by several otolaryngologists as a comprehensive review on tracheostomy is extremely difficult to compile mainly due to its voluminous nature and the difficulty in obtaining the scattered information, as isolated pieces of research, an attempt has been made to review some of the recent research publications to depict current research trends in the area of tracheostomy. An overview of the literature shows that percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is as safe and effective as surgical tracheostomy (ST). Although early and late post-operative complication rates are not statistically significant in the PDT group, further investigations of long-term outcome following PDT are therefore necessary. Generally, PDT has fewer acute complications than ST, although this may vary by the specific PDT technique. Patient factors also influence complications. In view of the benefit verses risks in tracheostomy, PDT may be considered the procedure of choice for performing elective tracheostomy in critically ill adult patients.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt; &lt;/p&gt;

Comparison of Elective Minimally Invasive with Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy in Adults.

Minimally invasive techniques were used for tracheostomy including small horizontal skin incision, limited soft tissue dissection and no suturing. A Retrospective analysis of case sheets of patients who underwent elective tracheostomy by the first and second authors at M S Ramaiah Hospitals in Bangalore between 1st May 2010 and 1st May 2015 was done to compare the result of elective conventional open surgical tracheostomy using midline vertical skin incision with minimally invasive tracheostomy using a short horizontal incision. No statistically significant difference in the peri and post operative complication rate was found. The patterns of intra and post operative complications reflected the choice of the surgical technique-the conventional technique had problems associated with wide dissection, whereas the minimally invasive technique had problems associated with limited exposure. Problems of wound gaping, emphysema and peristomal inflammation were reduced with minimally invasive technique with short horizontal skin incision although statistical difference could not be shown. There was also no statistically significant difference with either technique regards death and decannulation rates. Minimally invasive technique of elective open surgical tracheostomy was found to be as safe as conventional open surgical tracheostomy with midline vertical skin incision in the studied groups.

A novel tracheostomy technique for emergency airway: a randomized controlled study in minipigs

To compare cricothyroid membrane puncture directed tracheostomy (CMPDT) with conventional surgical tracheostomy (ST) and cricothyroidotomy (CT) and to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy and safety of this novel technique. 15 minipigs were divided randomly into 3 groups, 5 in each. After general anesthesia, CMPDT, ST and CT were performed respectively according to the established techniques when SPO₂reached 80% (T0). Procedure duration, ECG and arterial blood gas results were recorded. Complications were recorded and scored according to an established score scale by an observer blinded to the grouping. Airway was successfully established in all animals (15/15). ECG monitor showed T-wave decreased and Q-T shortened after seasing of oxygen supply and both recovered rapidly to normal levels after reoxygenation. There were no significant differences between 3 groups in HR, BP, SPO2, SaO₂, PaO₂, PaCO₂and pH at pre-apnea, T0 or post-operation, but with significant intragroup variation in the parameters before and after operation. The time for CMPDT, ST and CT was (174 ± 34) s, (619 ± 128) s and (86 ± 12) s respectively. Three of 5 minipigs in ST group experienced hypotension due to longer time of hypoxia. 1 and one had minor bleeding and stoma infection after surgery. One of 5 animals in CT group had minor laryngeal cartilage injury leading to difficult decannulation, postoperative fiber bronchoscopy showed no subglottic stenosis. The complication scores were 13, 9, and 3 for ST, CT and CMPDT, respectively. All 3 methods can provide with effective airway access with no significant differences in ventilation effect, however CMPDT has short recovery time for SpO2 and other vital signs with the lowest complication score. The animal experiment suggests that CMPDT is a fast, safe and effective surgical technique for emergency airway.

Clinical application of modified percutaneous dilative tracheostomy in intensive care unit

To investigate the application of modified percutaneous dilative tracheostomy (MPDT) in critical patients of intensive care unit (ICU). The clinical data of 143 critically ill patients experienced tracheostomy in intensive care unit (ICU) of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University were retrospectively analyzed. There were 55 cases in MPDT group, 41 in percutaneous dilative tracheostomy (PDT) group, and 47 in conventional surgical tracheostomy (ST) group. The operation information such as operation time, blood loss and the incidence of complications were observed among three groups. The operation time (7.2 ± 1.9 minutes, 6.9 ± 2.1 minutes), amount of blood loss (6.9 ± 2.7 mL, 8.0 ± 3.2 mL), size of operative incision (1.2 ± 1.1 cm, 1.3 ± 0.9 cm) and incision healing time (7.5 ± 2.0 days, 6.7 ± 1.9 days) in MPDT group and PDT group were superior to ST group (23.1 ± 4.5 minutes, 26.3 ± 3.8 mL, 2.8 ± 1.2 cm, 10.1 ± 2.1 days, respectively) with statistical significances (all P<0.05) but there was no significant difference in above indexes between MPDT group and PDT group. The incidences of perioperative and postoperative complications in MPDT group and PDT group were significantly lower than those in ST group [perioperative period: 23.64% (13/55), 41.46% (17/41) vs. 55.32% (26/47); postoperative period: 18.18% (10/55), 31.71% (13/41) vs. 55.32% (26/47)] with statistical significances (all P<0.05). There was no tracheal wall injury or perforation and tracheoesophageal fistula in MPDT group, while there were 5 tracheal wall injuries, 5 perforations, and 5 tracheoesophageal fistulas in PDT group. MPDT which is more effective, safe, simple and with minor injury than ST, is able to avoiding tracheal wall injury or perforation and tracheoesophageal fistula and is very suitable for patients in ICU.

Is Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy Safe to Perform in the Intensive Care Unit?

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is a commonly performed procedure in patients with respiratory failure. Its safety was compared with that of surgical tracheostomy at home and abroad. In Korea, Moon et al.[1] revealed the results skewed toward PDT in 1994 after comparing the two procedures. However, PDT had not been actively performed in local clinical contexts due to various reasons such as insurance coverage. In 2009, the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs officially recognized PDT as a new surgical procedure. Since then, clinical applications of PDT have gradually increased even in the intensive care unit (ICU).[2] The present journal includes a study whether there were differences in procedure time and complications between PDT performed by trainees subspecializing in critical care medicine (CCM) and intensivist-led PDT. But no differences were found.[3] In many studies, PDT has been shown to be safe and effective as conventional surgical tracheostomy (CST) in patients with normal airway anatomy. Bleeding, one of the major complications of PDT, occurred in 7% to 24% of patients, and mortality was less than 1% in patients with bleeding complications.[4-9] Their study found bleeding complications in 3.1% of patients in the trainee-led PDT group and 2.2% in the intensivist-led PDT group, showing no significant difference. Additional approach such as preoperative ultrasound therapy or intraoperative bronchoscopic guidance may lower the incidence of PDT-related complcations, although their effectiveness is still controversial in the absence of enough evidence.[10] However, these assisting procedures are likely useful to perform for better safety when physicians do not have enough experience to feel comfortable with PDT procedure. The safety of tracheostomy is affected by technical factors related to the procedure and surgical skills. And PDT can be simpler to perform for physicians with non-surgical specialty, compared with CST. In fact, residents in otorhinolaryngology demonstrated shorter procedure time and less complications when performing PDT, compared their performance with CST.[11] In previous study, they reported that PDT was a safe and feasible procedure to be performed by trainees in CCM with non-surgical specialty.[2] Our assertion was based on the fact that trainees participating in the subspeciality training program of CCM have their own specialty, which are as varied as internal medicine, surgery, anesthesia, etc. Most trainees have enough clinical and surgical experiences; they are well prepared to perform PDT after a short-term training backed by video simulation and participating in actual operations.

Truncus bicaroticus: An underestimated anatomic variation

To illustrate that a truncus bicaroticus and an elongated truncus brachiocephalicus are underestimated anatomic variations; and to highlight the risk of injury of these vessel anomalies during routine surgical interventions. Report of a woman with long-term ventilation who was planned for conventional surgical tracheostomy. Due to a strong pulsatile vessel crossing the cricoid cartilage, the procedure was stopped. Further diagnostics revealed anomalies of the supraaortic vessels, including a truncus bicaroticus. Anomalies of supraaortic vessels are not rare and injuries may cause severe bleeding; therefore, we recommend performing a preoperative ultrasound, particularly before starting dilatative tracheostomy.

Percutaneous Tracheostomy

The purpose of this review is to discuss the various techniques of percutaneous tracheostomy and to assess their safety and efficacy profile, indications and contraindications, early and late complications. Literature was reviewed from Medline and MD Consult databases. Early techniques by Sheldon, toye and Schachner have been abandoned due to their high complication rates. Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy using the Ciaglia kit (Wiliam Cook Europe Bjaeverskov) and a Griggs kit (Portex PDT kit, POrtex, Hythe, Kent, UK) has been used most often. Griggs guide Wire Dilator Forceps kit (SIMS, Portex, Hythe, Kent, UK) is the next most common in use but its long-term studies are few. Fantoni (TLT set, Mallinckrodt Medical) and PercuTwist device (Riisch, Kernen, Germany) are two new techniques currently under study. Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy and conventional surgical tracheostomy are still competing methods to provide an airway for intensive care patient requiring assisted ventilation. Review of literature shows that percutaneous tracheostomy is safe, cost-effective and compares favourably with the open surgical tracheostomy. Many intensive care units now use the percutaneous tracheostomy as a procedure of choice. Percutaneous tracheostomy has a learning curve and requires appropriate case selection and meticulous attention to the technique by all those who want to use this method.

Percutaneous dilatational versus conventional surgical tracheostomy in intensive care patients

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.

Comparison of the Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy by Pulmonologists and the Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy

Comparison of the Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy by Pulmonologists and the Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy