Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens

被引：2

作者：

Al-Qahtani K. ^{[1
,2
]}

Adamis J. ^{[1
]}

Tse J. ^{[1
]}

Harris J. ^{[1
]}

Islam T. ^{[3
]}

Seikaly H. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton

[2] Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, King Abdul Aziz University Hospital, King Saud University, PO Box no-245, Riyadh

[3] College of Medicine and Research Center, King Saud University, Riyadh

来源：

BMC Research Notes | / 8卷 / 1期

关键词：

Airway management; Mini open tracheostomy (MOT); Tracheal stenosis; Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheostomy (UPDT);

D O I：

10.1186/s13104-015-1199-4

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: To compare the ultra percutaneous dilation tracheostomy (PDT) and mini open techniques (MOT) in randomized fixed and fresh cadavers. Assess degrees of damage to tracheal cartilage and mucosa via tracheal lumen and external dissection. Method: Comparative cadaver study was performed, tracheostomy was placed in 36 cadavers (16 fixed, 20 fresh) from July 2004 to December 2004, in University of Alberta, Canada. PDT (size 7) were placed by intensivist and MOT (size 7) otolaryngologist. Both fixed and fresh cadavers were randomized. Evaluation was done according to gender, ease of landmark, mucosal and cartilage injuries. Results: Significant differences in mucosal injury (7 of 9 in UPDT VS 0 of 7 in MOT, p value 0.008), and cartilage injury (8 of 9 in UPDT VS 1 of 7 in MOT p value 0.012) were seen in fixed cadavers; and in fresh cadavers, mucosal injury (5 of 10 in UPDT VS 0 of 10 in MOT, p value 0.043), and cartilage injury (5 of 10 in UPDT VS 0 of 10 in MOT, p value 0.043). Conclusions: PDT resulted in severe damage to mucosa and cartilage, that might contribute to subglottic stenosis preventing decannulation. Considering the injury, MOT has better outcome than UPDT. © 2015 AL-Qahtani et al.

引用

共 43 条

[1]

Hotchkiss K.S., McCaffrey J.C., Laryngotracheal injury after percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in cadaver specimens, Laryngoscope, 113, 1, pp. 16-20, (2003)

[2]

Jackson C., Tracheostomy, Laryngoscope, 19, pp. 285-290, (1909)

[3]

Plummer A.L., Gracey D.R., Consensus conference on artificial airways in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, Chest, 96, pp. 178-180, (1989)

[4]

Walz M.K., Tracheostomy. Indications, methods, risks, Anaesthesist, 51, pp. 123-133, (2002)

[5]

Sheldon C.H., Pudenz R.H., Freshwater D.B., Crue B.L., A new method for tracheostomy, J Neurosurg, 12, (1955)

[6]

Ciaglia P., Firsching R., Syniec C., Elective percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. A new simple bedside procedure

[7]

Preliminary report, Chest, 87, pp. 715-719, (1985)

[8]

Ciaglia P., Graniero K., Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy: Result and long-term follow-up, Chest, 101, pp. 464-467, (1992)

[9]

Sue R.D., Susanto I., Long-term complications of artificial airways, Clin Chest Med, 24, pp. 457-471, (2003)

[10]

Fantoni A., Ripamonti D., A non-derivative, non-surgical tracheostomy: The translaryngeal method, Intensive Care Med, 23, pp. 386-392, (1997)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →