» Articles » PMID: 35874485

Comparison of Percutaneous Tracheostomy Methods in ICU Patients: Conventional Anatomical Landmark Method Versus Ultrasonography Method - A Randomised Controlled Trial

Overview
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2022 Jul 25
PMID 35874485
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Aims: Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) is a common procedure in intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring long-term mechanical ventilation. PDT has gradually replaced surgical tracheostomy because it is associated with minimal invasiveness, reduced bleeding and simplicity in technique.This study was conducted to compare ultrasound-guided PDT versus conventional tracheostomy in terms of duration of the procedure, number of passes and immediate peri-procedural complications.

Methods: A total of 72 patients with clinical indications of tracheostomy were recruited. A total of 12 patients met the exclusion criteria. The remaining were randomly assigned into two groups of 30 each: Group A (Landmark) with traditional anatomical landmark and Group B (USG) with real-time ultrasound guidance. Puncture positions were recorded with bronchoscopy. Midline deviation was captured on a bronchoscopy image using a protractor. Data on procedural safety and efficacy were also collected.

Results: Group B had significantly fewer cases of midline deviation (11.33 ± 9.51) in comparison to Group A (16.60 ± 12.31). Trials > 2 were equal to 11 in Group A and 2 in Group B. However, the duration of the procedure was higher in Group B (20.07 ± 3.25 min) as compared to Group A (15.20 ± 3.71 min). Peri-procedural and post-procedural complications were also higher in the Landmark group.

Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided PDT showed superiority over landmark PDT in terms of less number of trials, midline puncture and fewer complications. However, it took a little longer to perform USG-guided PDT.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of the Effect of Morphological Structure on Dilatational Tracheostomy Interference Location and Complications with Ultrasonography and Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy.

Bulut E, Arslan Yildiz U, Cengiz M, Yilmaz M, Kavakli A, Arici A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(10).

PMID: 38792330 PMC: 11122435. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13102788.


Optimising clinical outcomes with innovative research in the intensive care unit.

Patil V, Radhakrishnan M, Rao S, Kurdi M Indian J Anaesth. 2022; 66(8):549-552.

PMID: 36274796 PMC: 9580588. DOI: 10.4103/ija.ija_690_22.

References
1.
Flint A, Midde R, Rao V, Lasman T, Ho P . Bedside ultrasound screening for pretracheal vascular structures may minimize the risks of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Neurocrit Care. 2009; 11(3):372-6. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-009-9259-z. View

2.
Sarper A, Ayten A, Eser I, Ozbudak O, Demircan A . Tracheal stenosis aftertracheostomy or intubation: review with special regard to cause and management. Tex Heart Inst J. 2005; 32(2):154-8. PMC: 1163461. View

3.
Dennis B, Eckert M, Gunter O, Morris Jr J, May A . Safety of bedside percutaneous tracheostomy in the critically ill: evaluation of more than 3,000 procedures. J Am Coll Surg. 2013; 216(4):858-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.12.017. View

4.
Delaney A, Bagshaw S, Nalos M . Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2006; 10(2):R55. PMC: 1550905. DOI: 10.1186/cc4887. View

5.
Kollig E, Heydenreich U, Roetman B, Hopf F, Muhr G . Ultrasound and bronchoscopic controlled percutaneous tracheostomy on trauma ICU. Injury. 2000; 31(9):663-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(00)00094-2. View