Freeman B D, Isabella K, Lin N, Buchman T G
Department of Surgery, Section of Burn, Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Chest. 2000 Nov;118(5):1412-8. doi: 10.1378/chest.118.5.1412.
Tracheostomy is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the patient receiving long-term mechanical ventilation. While percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) is becoming increasingly utilized as an alternative to conventional surgical tracheostomy, most literature evaluating these two techniques is neither prospective nor controlled. We performed a meta-analysis of available prospective controlled studies comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients to more fully understand the relative benefits and risks of these two procedures in this population.
Meta-analysis using Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model.
We performed searches of MEDLINE, Current Contents, Best Evidence, Cochrane, and HealthSTAR databases from 1985 to present to identify prospective controlled studies comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients. After establishing clinical and statistical homogeneity (Q: statistic), studies were analyzed by a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. For each clinical end point examined, PDT and surgical tracheostomy were compared by calculating either absolute differences or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous or discrete variables, respectively.
We pooled data from five studies (236 patients) satisfying our search criteria to analyze eight clinical end points. Operative time was shorter for PDT than surgical tracheostomy: absolute difference with 95% CI, 9. 84 min (7.83 to 10.85 min). There was no difference comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy with respect to overall operative complication rates: OR with 95% CI, 0.732 (0.05 to 9.37). However, relative to surgical tracheostomy, PDT was associated with less perioperative bleeding (OR with 95% CI, 0.14 [0.02 to 0.39]), a lower overall postoperative complication rate (OR with 95% CI, 0.14 [0.07 to 0.29]), as well as a lower postoperative incidence of bleeding (OR with 95% CI, 0.39 [0.17 to 0.88]), and stomal infection (OR with 95% CI, 0.02 [0.01 to 0.07]). No difference was identified in days intubated prior to tracheostomy (absolute difference with 95% CI, 0.16 days [- 0.9 to 1.22 days]), overall procedure-related complications (OR with 95% CI, 0.73 [0.06 to 9.37]), or death (OR with 95% CI, 0.63 [0.18 to 2.20]) comparing these two techniques.
Despite its popularity, there are currently only a limited number of small studies prospectively evaluating PDT and surgical tracheostomy. Our meta-analysis of these studies suggests potential advantages of PDT relative to surgical tracheostomy, including ease of performance, and lower incidence of peristomal bleeding and postoperative infection. If confirmed by additional, adequately powered prospective trials, these findings support PDT as the procedure of choice for the establishment of elective tracheostomy in the appropriately selected critically ill patient.
气管切开术是长期接受机械通气患者最常实施的手术之一。虽然经皮扩张气管切开术(PDT)作为传统外科气管切开术的替代方法越来越多地被使用,但大多数评估这两种技术的文献既非前瞻性研究也非对照研究。我们对现有的比较PDT和外科气管切开术在重症患者中的前瞻性对照研究进行了荟萃分析,以更全面地了解这两种手术在该人群中的相对益处和风险。
使用Mantel-Haenszel固定效应模型进行荟萃分析。
我们检索了1985年至今的MEDLINE、《现刊目次》、《最佳证据》、Cochrane和HealthSTAR数据库,以确定比较PDT和外科气管切开术在重症患者中的前瞻性对照研究。在建立临床和统计同质性(Q统计量)后,采用Mantel-Haenszel固定效应模型对研究进行分析。对于每个检查的临床终点,分别通过计算连续或离散变量的绝对差值或比值比(OR)及95%置信区间(CI)来比较PDT和外科气管切开术。
我们汇总了五项符合检索标准的研究(236例患者)的数据,以分析八个临床终点。PDT的手术时间比外科气管切开术短:95%CI的绝对差值为9.84分钟(7.83至10.85分钟)。比较PDT和外科气管切开术的总体手术并发症发生率无差异:95%CI的OR为0.732(0.05至9.37)。然而,相对于外科气管切开术,PDT与围手术期出血较少(95%CI的OR为0.14[0.02至0.39])、总体术后并发症发生率较低(95%CI的OR为0.14[0.07至0.29])以及术后出血发生率较低(95%CI的OR为0.39[0.17至0.88])和造口感染发生率较低(95%CI的OR为0.02[0.01至0.07])相关。比较这两种技术,气管切开术前的插管天数(95%CI的绝对差值为0.16天[-0.9至1.22天])、总体手术相关并发症(95%CI的OR为0.73[0.06至9.37])或死亡(95%CI的OR为0.63[0.18至2.20])未发现差异。
尽管PDT很受欢迎,但目前前瞻性评估PDT和外科气管切开术的小型研究数量有限。我们对这些研究的荟萃分析表明,PDT相对于外科气管切开术具有潜在优势,包括操作简便以及造口周围出血和术后感染发生率较低。如果通过更多有足够效力的前瞻性试验得到证实,这些发现支持将PDT作为在适当选择的重症患者中建立选择性气管切开术的首选方法。