• 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

经皮扩张气管切开术与开放性气管切开术一样安全。

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is as safe as open tracheostomy.

作者信息

Khalili Theodore M, Koss Wega, Margulies Daniel R, Morrison Esther, Shabot M Michael

机构信息

Burns and Allen Research Institute, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and the UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 90048, USA.

出版信息

Am Surg. 2002 Jan;68(1):92-4.

PMID:12467327
Abstract

Although percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) has been advocated as an alternative to open tracheostomy (OT) its relative safety has been questioned repeatedly. This study prospectively compared the safety and complications of PDT and OT. Ninety-four patients underwent PDT and 252 patients underwent OT at this institution from December 1998 through April 2000 with the choice of procedure left to the operator. OT was performed in the operating room whereas PDT was performed in intensive care units (ICUs). PDT was performed by surgeons and medical intensivists under a strict institutional policy and procedure governing patient selection and conduct of the procedure. Complications were defined as bleeding, loss of airway, hypotension, hypoxia, tracheostomy tube malposition, subcutaneous emphysema, infection, and conversion of PDT to OT. All patients survived the operation. PDT and OT had similar complication rates: 2.1 per cent for PDT versus 2.8 per cent for OT (P = not significant). Postoperative bleeding, which was the most frequent complication, occurred in one PDT patient and four OT patients. One PDT patient required conversion to OT as a result of extensive tracheal fibrosis. Subcutaneous emphysema, soft-tissue infection, and a malpositioned tracheostomy tube were the remaining complications in the OT patients. We conclude that the complication rates of PDT and OT are comparable. The choice of PDT or OT should be dictated by the surgeon's training and experience, the patient's condition, neck anatomy, and stability for transfer to the operating room.

摘要

尽管经皮扩张气管切开术(PDT)已被提倡作为开放气管切开术(OT)的替代方法,但其相对安全性却屡屡受到质疑。本研究前瞻性地比较了PDT和OT的安全性及并发症情况。1998年12月至2000年4月期间,该机构有94例患者接受了PDT,252例患者接受了OT,手术方式由操作者选择。OT在手术室进行,而PDT在重症监护病房(ICU)进行。PDT由外科医生和内科重症监护医生在严格的机构政策和程序下进行,该政策和程序规定了患者选择和手术操作。并发症定义为出血、气道丧失、低血压、低氧血症、气管切开管位置异常、皮下气肿、感染以及PDT转为OT。所有患者均存活至手术结束。PDT和OT的并发症发生率相似:PDT为2.1%,OT为2.8%(P值无统计学意义)。术后出血是最常见的并发症,1例PDT患者和4例OT患者发生了术后出血。1例PDT患者因广泛气管纤维化而需要转为OT。皮下气肿、软组织感染和气管切开管位置异常是OT患者的其他并发症。我们得出结论,PDT和OT的并发症发生率相当。PDT或OT的选择应由外科医生的培训和经验、患者状况、颈部解剖结构以及转至手术室的稳定性来决定。

相似文献

1
Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is as safe as open tracheostomy.经皮扩张气管切开术与开放性气管切开术一样安全。
Am Surg. 2002 Jan;68(1):92-4.
2
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.
3
Percutaneous tracheostomy: a safe procedure in the morbidly obese.经皮气管切开术:在病态肥胖患者中是一种安全的手术。
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Apr;202(4):618-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.12.009.
4
Prospective observational study of postoperative complications after percutaneous dilatational or surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients.经皮扩张或手术气管切开术后危重症患者术后并发症的前瞻性观察研究。
Crit Care Resusc. 2009 Dec;11(4):244-9.
5
Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy: still a surgical procedure.经皮扩张气管切开术:仍然是一种外科手术。
Am Surg. 1999 Oct;65(10):982-6.
6
[Early and long-term results of percutaneous dilatation tracheostomy (PDT Ciaglia) in 195 intensive care patients].[195例重症监护患者经皮扩张气管切开术(Ciaglia法)的早期及长期结果]
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 1998 May;33(5):306-12. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-994254.
7
Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy: an initial experience in community based teaching hospital.经皮扩张气管切开术:在社区教学医院的初步经验。
Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2006 Jul-Sep;4(3):275-80.
8
Can intensive care physicians safely perform percutaneous dilational tracheostomy? An analysis of 207 cases.重症监护医师能否安全地实施经皮扩张气管切开术?207例病例分析。
Isr Med Assoc J. 2007 Oct;9(10):717-9.
9
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.
10
Comparison of open versus bedside percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in the cardiothoracic surgical patient: outcomes and financial analysis.心胸外科手术患者开放性与床旁经皮扩张气管切开术的比较:结果与财务分析
Ann Thorac Surg. 2005 Jun;79(6):1879-85. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.10.042.

引用本文的文献

1
Evolution of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy--a review of current techniques and their pitfalls.经皮扩张气管切开术的演变——对当前技术及其缺陷的综述。
World J Surg. 2013 Jul;37(7):1633-46. doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2025-6.
2
Surgical versus percutaneous tracheostomy: an evidence-based approach.手术与经皮气管切开术:循证方法。
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011 Mar;268(3):323-30. doi: 10.1007/s00405-010-1398-5. Epub 2010 Oct 19.
3
Videobronchoscopic guidance makes percutaneous dilational tracheostomy safer.视频支气管镜引导使经皮扩张气管切开术更安全。
Surg Endosc. 2004 May;18(5):839-42. doi: 10.1007/s00464-003-9082-0.