Keirns Darby L, Rajan Ajay K, Wee Shirline H, Govardhan Isheeta S, Eitan Dana N, Dilsaver Danielle B, Ng Ian, Balters Marcus W
Department of Surgery, Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, USA.
Department of Clinical Research and Public Health, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, USA.
Cureus. 2024 Mar 27;16(3):e57075. doi: 10.7759/cureus.57075. eCollection 2024 Mar.
This study aims to investigate if there is an increased risk of developing tracheal stenosis after tracheostomy with an open versus percutaneous tracheostomy.
The patient cohort included patients receiving open or percutaneous tracheostomies at Catholic Health Initiatives Midwest facilities from January 2017 to June 2023. The primary aim was to compare the differences in the risk of developing tracheal stenosis between open and percutaneous tracheostomy techniques. Between-technique differences in the risk of developing tracheal stenosis were assessed via a Cox proportional hazard model. To account for death precluding patients from developing tracheal stenosis, death was considered a competing risk.
A total of 828 patients met inclusion criteria (61.7% open, 38.3% percutaneous); 2.5% (N = 21) developed tracheal stenosis. The median number of days to develop tracheal stenosis was 84 (interquartile range: 60 to 243, range: 6 to 739). Tracheal stenosis was more frequent in patients who received a percutaneous tracheostomy (percutaneous: 3.5% vs. open: 2.0%); however, the risk of developing tracheal stenosis was statistically similar between open and percutaneous techniques (HR: 2.05, 95% CI: 0.86-4.94, p = 0.108).
This study demonstrates no significant difference in the development of tracheal stenosis when performing an open versus a percutaneous tracheostomy. Tracheal stenosis is a long-term complication of tracheostomy and should not influence the decision about the surgical technique used.
本研究旨在调查开放式与经皮气管切开术后发生气管狭窄的风险是否增加。
患者队列包括2017年1月至2023年6月在天主教医疗倡议中西部设施接受开放式或经皮气管切开术的患者。主要目的是比较开放式和经皮气管切开术技术在发生气管狭窄风险上的差异。通过Cox比例风险模型评估气管狭窄发生风险的技术间差异。为了考虑死亡使患者无法发生气管狭窄的情况,将死亡视为竞争风险。
共有828名患者符合纳入标准(61.7%为开放式,38.3%为经皮式);2.5%(N = 21)发生了气管狭窄。发生气管狭窄的中位天数为84天(四分位间距:60至243天,范围:6至739天)。接受经皮气管切开术的患者气管狭窄更为常见(经皮式:3.5% vs. 开放式:2.0%);然而开放式和经皮式技术在发生气管狭窄的风险上在统计学上相似(风险比:2.05,95%置信区间:0.86 - 4.94,p = 0.108)。
本研究表明,进行开放式与经皮式气管切开术时,气管狭窄的发生无显著差异。气管狭窄是气管切开术的一种长期并发症,不应影响所采用手术技术的决策。