Suppr超能文献

[长期依赖呼吸机患者的气管切开术?]

[Tracheotomy for the long-term ventilator-dependent patient?].

作者信息

Klockgether-Radke A P, Neumann P, Quintel M

机构信息

Zentrum Anästhesiologie, Rettungs- und Intensivmedizin, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen.

出版信息

Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2004 Jun;39(6):335-43. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-814311.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Tracheotomy is commonly performed in long-term ventilated patients. The aim of this review is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of tracheotomy.

METHODS

Review of the literature.

RESULTS

Disadvantages of tracheotomy include the risk of bleeding, infection, injury of the truncus brachiocephalicus, and of long-term tracheal injury. These risks must be compared with the risk of vocal cord trauma, laryngeal trauma, and subglottic stenosis following translaryngeal intubation. Despite a number of disadvantages and potentially even life-threatening complications, however, tracheotomy is a well-established technique for long-term airway management in critically ill patients. Potential advantages of tracheotomy include enhanced patient comfort, reduced airway resistance and dead space, a lower incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and hospital stay. Patient comfort before and after tracheotomy has not yet been seriously evaluated, using modern ventilators airway resistance does not longer play a major role. No data from randomized controlled trials actually support the thesis that tracheotomy reduces the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. There is weak evidence for the concept that the duration of mechanical ventilation can be reduced in patients while using tracheotomy. Patients undergoing percutaneous dilational tracheotomy seem to have a reduced risk of bleeding and site infection and a shorter duration of the procedure when compared to those with conventional surgical tracheotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Many clinicians perform tracheotomies on the basis of expert opinion and clinical experience. So far, the benefits, however, have not been proven in large-scale randomized trials. Many of these studies suffer from design flaws, insufficient randomization and the absence of blinding. On the other hand, the lack of positive results do not rule out that tracheotomy may be beneficial for the ventilator-dependent patient. Percutaneous tracheotomy procedures may be superior to conventional surgical tracheotomies. Long-term results, however, will have to prove this preliminary observation.

摘要

目的

气管切开术常用于长期机械通气患者。本综述旨在探讨气管切开术的利弊。

方法

文献回顾。

结果

气管切开术的弊端包括出血、感染、头臂干损伤以及长期气管损伤的风险。这些风险必须与经喉插管后的声带损伤、喉损伤和声门下狭窄的风险相比较。然而,尽管存在诸多弊端甚至可能危及生命的并发症,但气管切开术仍是危重症患者长期气道管理的成熟技术。气管切开术的潜在优势包括提高患者舒适度、降低气道阻力和死腔、降低呼吸机相关性肺炎的发生率以及缩短机械通气时间和住院时间。气管切开术前和术后患者的舒适度尚未得到认真评估,使用现代呼吸机后气道阻力不再起主要作用。实际上,没有随机对照试验的数据支持气管切开术可降低呼吸机相关性肺炎发生率这一论点。有微弱证据支持气管切开术可缩短患者机械通气时间这一概念。与传统外科气管切开术相比,接受经皮扩张气管切开术的患者出血和手术部位感染风险降低,手术时间缩短。

结论

许多临床医生基于专家意见和临床经验进行气管切开术。然而,迄今为止,其益处尚未在大规模随机试验中得到证实。这些研究中有许多存在设计缺陷、随机化不足和缺乏盲法等问题。另一方面,缺乏阳性结果并不排除气管切开术可能对依赖呼吸机的患者有益。经皮气管切开术可能优于传统外科气管切开术。然而,长期结果仍需证实这一初步观察结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验