Suppr超能文献

一级创伤中心中气管切开术在颅颌面创伤中的应用

Utilization of tracheostomy in craniomaxillofacial trauma at a level-1 trauma center.

作者信息

Holmgren Eric P, Bagheri Shahrokh, Bell R Bryan, Bobek Sam, Dierks Eric J

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA

出版信息

J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007 Oct;65(10):2005-10. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2007.05.019.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The decision to perform a tracheostomy on patients with maxillofacial trauma is complex. There is little data exploring the role of tracheostomy in facial fracture management. We sought to profile the utilization of tracheostomy in the context of maxillofacial trauma at our institution by comparing patients who required tracheostomy with and without facial fractures versus those with facial fractures not requiring tracheostomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients admitted to the Trauma Service at Legacy Emanuel Hospital and Health Center (LEHHC), Portland, OR, from 1993 to 2003 that sustained facial fractures or underwent tracheostomy were identified and data were retrospectively reviewed using patient charts and the trauma registry. Variables such as age, gender, death, injury severity score (ISS), facial injury severity score (FISS), Glasgow coma score (GCS), intensive care days (ICU), hospital length of stay (LOS), facial fracture profile, and oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) operative intervention were tabulated and analyzed. Data were divided into 3 groups for comparison: group 1 (ffxT) consisted of patients who underwent a tracheostomy procedure and repair of their facial fracture during the SAME operation by the OMFS department (N = 125); group 2 (ffxNT) were those patients who had repair of their facial fractures by OMFS and did not require a tracheostomy (N = 224); and group 3 (NffxT) were patients who did not have facial fractures but received a tracheostomy during their hospitalization (N = 259). Ten-year data were used to analyze the ffxT and 5-year data were used to analyze the ffxNT and NffxT. Analysis of variance and chi2 testing was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 18,187 patients were admitted to the trauma LEHHC Trauma Service during the study period, of which 1,079 (5.9%) patients sustained facial fractures and 788 (4.3%) required a tracheostomy. One hundred twenty-five patients (0.69% of total; 11.6% of facial fracture) received a tracheostomy at the same time as the facial fracture repair. All patients had their facial fractures successfully managed, regardless of the type of method used to stabilize the airway. There were no known cases of tracheal stenosis, severe bleeding requiring a return to the operating room, airway obstruction, or loss of secured airway. Males were the predominate gender in all 3 groups. The NffxT group (mean, 44.9 years) was much older compared with the ffxT (mean, 36.2 years) and ffxNT (mean, 30.9 years) groups. The incidence of death was higher in the tracheostomy groups compared with 0% with the non-tracheostomy group. The ffxNT group had a statistically significant higher GCS with an average of 12.4 when compared with the tracheostomy groups (ffxT = 6.8; NffxT = 6.7). ISS was nearly the same in the tracheostomy group (ffxT = 28.45; NffxT = 30.04), but higher when compared with the ffxNT (ISS = 17.33). All 3 groups were much different in terms of LOS and ICU days, in which the NffxT group had an average hospital LOS and ICU days of 34.4 and 16.56, respectively. This was higher when compared with the ffxT (LOS = 19.71 days; ICU = 7.21 days) and ffxNT (LOS = 6.82 days; ICU = 1.33 days) groups. The FISS averaged 6.22 in the ffxT group and was higher compared with an FISS of 3.16 in the ffxNT group. Overall, the fracture profile was different between the tracheostomy and non-tracheostomy groups. There was a higher prevalence of mandibular fractures, multiple mandibular fractures, and Le Fort III fractures in the ffxT group compared with the ffxNT group.

CONCLUSION

Tracheostomy is commonly performed in the context of multisystem trauma and is a safe method for airway stabilization in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma. Multi-institutional collaboration and a prospective, randomized trial measuring outcome, resource utilization, and length of ICU stay is necessary to determine if tracheostomy is indeed of measurable benefit to patients with complex injuries.

摘要

目的

对于颌面创伤患者而言,决定是否实施气管切开术是一个复杂的问题。目前鲜有数据探讨气管切开术在颌面骨折治疗中的作用。我们试图通过比较需要气管切开术的颌面骨折患者与未发生颌面骨折患者以及颌面骨折但无需气管切开术的患者,来分析我院颌面创伤患者气管切开术的应用情况。

材料与方法

对1993年至2003年期间入住俄勒冈州波特兰市伊曼纽尔遗产医院和健康中心(LEHHC)创伤科且发生颌面骨折或接受气管切开术的所有患者进行了识别,并使用患者病历和创伤登记系统对数据进行回顾性分析。对年龄、性别、死亡情况、损伤严重程度评分(ISS)、面部损伤严重程度评分(FISS)、格拉斯哥昏迷评分(GCS)、重症监护天数(ICU)、住院时间(LOS)、颌面骨折情况以及口腔颌面外科(OMFS)手术干预等变量进行列表分析。数据分为3组进行比较:第1组(ffxT)由在同一手术中接受气管切开术并由OMFS科室修复颌面骨折的患者组成(N = 125);第2组(ffxNT)是那些接受OMFS修复颌面骨折但无需气管切开术的患者(N = 224);第3组(NffxT)是未发生颌面骨折但在住院期间接受气管切开术的患者(N = 259)。使用10年的数据来分析ffxT组,使用5年的数据来分析ffxNT组和NffxT组。采用方差分析和卡方检验进行统计分析。

结果

在研究期间,共有18187名患者入住LEHHC创伤科,其中1079名(5.9%)患者发生颌面骨折,788名(4.3%)患者需要气管切开术。125名患者(占总数的0.69%;占颌面骨折患者的11.6%)在修复颌面骨折的同时接受了气管切开术。无论采用何种气道稳定方法,所有患者的颌面骨折均得到成功治疗。没有已知的气管狭窄、需要返回手术室处理的严重出血、气道阻塞或气道固定失败的病例。在所有3组中,男性均占主导。NffxT组(平均年龄44.9岁)比ffxT组(平均年龄36.2岁)和ffxNT组(平均年龄30.9岁)年龄大得多。气管切开术组的死亡率高于非气管切开术组(非气管切开术组死亡率为0%)。与气管切开术组(ffxT = 6.8;NffxT = 6.7)相比,ffxNT组的GCS在统计学上显著更高,平均为12.4。气管切开术组(ffxT = 28.45;NffxT = 30.04)的ISS与ffxNT组(ISS = 17.33)相近,但高于ffxNT组。所有3组在住院时间和ICU天数方面差异很大,其中NffxT组的平均住院时间和ICU天数分别为34.4天和16.56天。与ffxT组(住院时间 = 19.71天;ICU = 7.21天)和ffxNT组(住院时间 = 6.82天;ICU = 1.33天)相比更高。ffxT组的FISS平均为6.22,高于ffxNT组的FISS(3.16)。总体而言,气管切开术组和非气管切开术组的骨折情况不同。与ffxNT组相比,ffxT组下颌骨骨折、多发性下颌骨骨折和Le Fort III型骨折的患病率更高。

结论

气管切开术常在多系统创伤情况下实施,是颅颌面创伤患者气道稳定的一种安全方法。需要多机构合作以及进行一项前瞻性随机试验,以测量结果、资源利用情况和ICU住院时间,来确定气管切开术对复杂损伤患者是否确实具有可衡量的益处。

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