[Comparative study of percutaneous tracheotomy and conventional surgical tracheotomy in patients with prolonged intubation].

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous tracheotomy (PT) has become an alternative to conventional surgical tracheotomy (CST) in recent years. Our aim was to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two techniques in our intensive care unit (ICU).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two patient groups were compared. Sixty underwent PT and 47 underwent CST, and all were admitted to the ICU between May 1995 and August 1997. PT was performed in 49 by way of progressive dilations, and 11 were performed by Griggs' method using a dilator. Variables studied were age, sex, reason for admission, APACHE II upon admission to the ICU, duration of technique, and immediate and late complications. Statistical analysis was provided by applying a Student t test to contrast quantitative variables and a chi-squared test to compare proportions.

RESULTS

The following variables were significantly different. APACHE II upon admission was 18 +/- 5 in the PT group and 15 +/- 6 in the CST group (p < 0.002). Duration of the procedure was 15 +/- 4 minutes in the PT group and 36 +/- 11 in the CST group (p < 0.005). Complications after tracheotomy in PT group patients consisted of 1 false line during a change of cannula and 1 late tracheoesophageal fistula. Complications in the CST group included 16 episodes of slight bleeding, 9 stoma infections, 3 cases of pneumothorax, 2 of bad scarring of the stoma and 1 late fistula (p < 0.005). Time of follow-up was 41 to 76 days for PT patients and 32 to 51 days for CST patients.

CONCLUSIONS

PT is a fast, simple procedure that is easy to manage and requires fewer resources (operating theater, personnel and equipment) and causes fewer medium-term complications than does CST.