Suppr超能文献

心脏外科手术患者的气管切开术:手术气管切开术与齐亚利亚法和法托尼奥法对比

Tracheostomy in cardiosurgical patients: surgical tracheostomy versus ciaglia and fantoni methods.

作者信息

Westphal K, Byhahn C, Rinne T, Wilke H J, Wimmer-Greinecker G, Lischke V

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy, J.W. Goethe-University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany.

出版信息

Ann Thorac Surg. 1999 Aug;68(2):486-92. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(99)00565-2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation are not uncommon in a cardiosurgical intensive care unit. Elective tracheostomy is considered the airway treatment of choice in these patients.

METHODS

To evaluate different techniques for tracheostomy, we prospectively investigated 120 patients who had conventional open (n = 40), minimally invasive percutaneous dilatational (n = 40), or translaryngeal (n = 40) tracheostomy techniques. The main areas of investigation included oxygenation index (partial pressure of arterial oxygen divided by fraction of inspired oxygen), complications, infection, and cost.

RESULTS

The oxygenation index decreased in almost every patient, regardless of the technique used, but the extent of decrease was significantly lower in both minimally invasive techniques compared with the conventional method. Overall complication rate was 12.5% both in open tracheostomy and in percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy, whereas no complications occurred in translaryngeal tracheostomy procedures. Bacterial contamination of the tracheostomy site was found in 35% of the open tracheostomies, whereas no infection was seen in percutaneous dilatational or translaryngeal tracheostomies. In terms of costs, PDT ($506) and TLT ($362) were both much cheaper than open tracheostomy ($699).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous dilatational and translaryngeal tracheostomies are safe and cost-effective procedures that can be done easily at the patient's bedside and thus are attractive alternatives to conventional surgical tracheostomy in long-term airway access in a cardiosurgical intensive care unit.

摘要

背景

在心脏外科重症监护病房,需要长期机械通气的患者并不少见。择期气管切开术被认为是这些患者气道治疗的首选方法。

方法

为评估不同的气管切开术技术,我们前瞻性地研究了120例接受传统开放气管切开术(n = 40)、微创经皮扩张气管切开术(n = 40)或经喉气管切开术(n = 40)的患者。主要研究领域包括氧合指数(动脉血氧分压除以吸入氧分数)、并发症、感染和成本。

结果

几乎每位患者的氧合指数均下降,无论采用何种技术,但与传统方法相比,两种微创技术的下降程度均显著更低。开放气管切开术和经皮扩张气管切开术的总体并发症发生率均为12.5%,而经喉气管切开术未发生并发症。35%的开放气管切开术患者出现气管切开部位细菌污染,而经皮扩张气管切开术或经喉气管切开术未见感染。在成本方面,经皮扩张气管切开术(506美元)和经喉气管切开术(362美元)均比开放气管切开术(699美元)便宜得多。

结论

经皮扩张气管切开术和经喉气管切开术是安全且具有成本效益的手术,可在患者床边轻松完成,因此在心脏外科重症监护病房的长期气道通路建立方面,是传统外科气管切开术有吸引力的替代方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验