• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

经皮气管切开术:Ciaglia技术与Griggs技术的比较。

Percutaneous tracheostomy: comparison of Ciaglia and Griggs techniques.

作者信息

Kost K M

机构信息

McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

Crit Care. 2000;4(3):143-6. doi: 10.1186/cc686. Epub 2000 May 15.

DOI:10.1186/cc686
PMID:11094499
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC137251/
Abstract

Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is at least as safe as standard open tracheostomy in the operating room (OR). Recently, a single dilator was introduced to accomplish dilatation of the tracheal aperture in one step, thus obviating the need for multiple graduated dilators. Experience with endoscopic percutaneous tracheostomy (PCT) using the single dilator in 40 patients to date supports the premise that the procedure is safe, rapid, and technically simple. In the study by Añon et al, two very different techniques, are compared: the Ciaglia percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy technique using multiple dilators and the Griggs percutaneous technique using guidewire-dilating forceps. Although relative complication rates for the two techniques are not significantly different, both procedures are performed in a 'blind' fashion, without the benefit of a bronchoscope. The reported incidence of serious complications in this study is high, and almost certainly avoidable with the addition of direct bronchoscopic visualization. Operative time is reported to be shorter with the Griggs technique, but this finding is unlikely to hold true for the single dilator technique, which reduces procedure time to less than 15 min. This author's experience with bedside endoscopic PCT using the single dilator indicates that it is a safe, rapid and cost-effective procedure with a low complication rate.

摘要

内镜下经皮扩张气管切开术在手术室中的安全性至少与标准开放性气管切开术相当。最近,一种单一扩张器被引入,可一步完成气管造口的扩张,从而无需使用多个分级扩张器。迄今为止,对40例患者使用单一扩张器进行内镜下经皮气管切开术(PCT)的经验支持了该手术安全、快速且技术简单的前提。在Añon等人的研究中,比较了两种截然不同的技术:使用多个扩张器的Ciaglia经皮扩张气管切开术技术和使用导丝扩张钳的Griggs经皮技术。尽管这两种技术的相对并发症发生率没有显著差异,但两种手术都是在“盲目”状态下进行的,没有支气管镜的辅助。该研究中报道的严重并发症发生率很高,而通过直接支气管镜可视化几乎肯定可以避免。据报道,Griggs技术的手术时间较短,但这一发现对于单一扩张器技术不太可能成立,后者可将手术时间缩短至不到15分钟。作者使用单一扩张器进行床边内镜PCT的经验表明,这是一种安全、快速且具有成本效益的手术,并发症发生率低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/8d6164ad3ca9/cc686-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/eb7999ba5051/cc686-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/a5bbb7ddfd50/cc686-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/8d6164ad3ca9/cc686-3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/eb7999ba5051/cc686-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/a5bbb7ddfd50/cc686-2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/be29/137251/8d6164ad3ca9/cc686-3.jpg

相似文献

1
Percutaneous tracheostomy: comparison of Ciaglia and Griggs techniques.经皮气管切开术:Ciaglia技术与Griggs技术的比较。
Crit Care. 2000;4(3):143-6. doi: 10.1186/cc686. Epub 2000 May 15.
2
Open versus percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy: efficacy and cost analysis.开放性与经皮扩张气管切开术:疗效与成本分析
Am Surg. 2001 Apr;67(4):297-301; discussion 301-2.
3
Percutaneous tracheostomy with single dilatation technique: a prospective, randomized comparison of Ciaglia blue rhino versus Griggs' guidewire dilating forceps.单扩张技术经皮气管切开术:Ciaglia蓝犀牛套件与Griggs导丝扩张钳的前瞻性随机对照研究
Anesth Analg. 2002 Dec;95(6):1739-45, table of contents. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200212000-00050.
4
Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy: a prospective evaluation of 500 consecutive cases.内镜下经皮扩张气管切开术:500例连续病例的前瞻性评估。
Laryngoscope. 2005 Oct;115(10 Pt 2):1-30. doi: 10.1097/01.MLG.0000163744.89688.E8.
5
A simple modification of Ciaglia Blue Rhino technique for tracheostomy: using a guidewire dilating forceps for initial dilation.一种用于气管切开术的改良Ciaglia Blue Rhino技术:使用导丝扩张钳进行初始扩张。
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Jan;31(1):114-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.10.006. Epub 2006 Oct 25.
6
PercuTwist: a new alternative to Griggs and Ciaglia's techniques.PercuTwist:格里格斯和恰利亚技术的一种新替代方法。
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2007 Jun;24(6):492-7. doi: 10.1017/S0265021506002274. Epub 2007 Jan 8.
7
Comparison of safety and cost of percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy.经皮气管切开术与外科气管切开术的安全性及成本比较。
Am Surg. 2001 Jan;67(1):54-60.
8
[The cost-efficiency and safety of bedside forceps dilatational tracheostomy in the intensive care unit].[重症监护病房床旁钳扩法气管切开术的成本效益与安全性]
Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2010 Sep;22(9):537-9.
9
Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy with bronchoscopic guidance: Ramathibodi experience.支气管镜引导下经皮扩张气管切开术:拉玛蒂博迪医院的经验。
J Med Assoc Thai. 2007 Aug;90(8):1512-7.
10
Pitfalls in percutaneous dilational tracheostomy using the Ciaglia one-step technique.使用Ciaglia一步法经皮扩张气管切开术的陷阱
South Med J. 2008 Mar;101(3):297-302. doi: 10.1097/SMJ.0b013e318164dc78.

引用本文的文献

1
Tracheostomy Practice in the Italian Intensive Care Units: A Point-Prevalence Survey.意大利重症监护病房的气管切开术实践:一项现况调查。
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Jan 7;61(1):87. doi: 10.3390/medicina61010087.
2
Naushad's Modification of Griggs Percutaneous Tracheostomy: Retrospective Case Series Study on 200 Patients at Subharti Medical College, Meerut, India.瑙沙德对格里格斯经皮气管切开术的改良:印度密拉特苏巴蒂医学院200例患者的回顾性病例系列研究
Maedica (Bucur). 2022 Mar;17(1):64-73. doi: 10.26574/maedica.2022.17.1.64.
3
Comparison of Ciaglia and Griggs Percutaneous Tracheostomy Techniques - A Biomechanical Animal Study.

本文引用的文献

1
Percutaneous tracheostomy: comparison of Ciaglia and Griggs techniques.经皮气管切开术:Ciaglia技术与Griggs技术的比较
Crit Care. 2000;4(2):124-8. doi: 10.1186/cc667. Epub 2000 Mar 3.
2
Percutaneous or surgical tracheostomy: a meta-analysis.经皮或外科气管切开术:一项荟萃分析。
Crit Care Med. 1999 Aug;27(8):1617-25. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199908000-00041.
3
Percutaneous tracheostomy: a comprehensive evaluation.经皮气管切开术:一项综合评估。
恰利亚与格里格斯经皮气管切开术技术比较——一项生物力学动物研究
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2019 Jun;23(6):247-250. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23174.
4
A technical modification for percutaneous tracheostomy: prospective case series study on one hundred patients.经皮气管切开术的技术改良:100 例前瞻性病例系列研究。
World J Emerg Surg. 2011 Nov 2;6:35. doi: 10.1186/1749-7922-6-35.
5
Use of LMA as ventilatory device for PCT: Our experience.喉罩作为院前心肺复苏通气设备的应用:我们的经验。
Indian J Anaesth. 2011 Mar;55(2):207-8. doi: 10.4103/0019-5049.79882.
6
Fantoni translaryngeal tracheostomy versus ciaglia blue rhino percutaneous tracheostomy: a retrospective comparison.经 Fantoni 经声门气管造口术与 ciaglia blue rhino 经皮气管造口术的回顾性比较。
Surg Today. 2009;39(5):387-92. doi: 10.1007/s00595-008-3899-z. Epub 2009 Apr 30.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1999 Apr;108(4):384-91. doi: 10.1177/000348949910800412.
4
Comparison of percutaneous and surgical tracheostomies.经皮气管切开术与外科气管切开术的比较。
Chest. 1996 Aug;110(2):480-5. doi: 10.1378/chest.110.2.480.
5
Tracheostomy: a retrospective review of 281 cases.气管切开术:281例回顾性研究
J Otolaryngol. 1994 Feb;23(1):61-6.
6
Risk, cost, and benefit of transporting ICU patients for special studies.为进行特殊检查而转运重症监护病房患者的风险、成本和益处。
J Trauma. 1988 Jul;28(7):1020-5. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198807000-00018.
7
Comparative clinical trial of standard operative tracheostomy with percutaneous tracheostomy.标准手术气管切开术与经皮气管切开术的比较临床试验
Crit Care Med. 1991 Aug;19(8):1018-24. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199108000-00008.