Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Üçüncü Basamak Yoğun Bakım Ünitesinde Perkutan Trakeostomi Olgularının Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2019, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 245 - 249, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.34084/bshr.647658

Abstract

Amaç: Perkütan trakeostomi, işlemi yoğun
bakım ünitelerinde, özellikle uzun süreli mekanik ventilatör desteği gerektiren
hastalarda sıklıkla uygulanmaktadır. Güvenli havayolunun sağlanması, hava
yollarının aspirasyonunun kolaylaştırılması ve yoğun bakım ünitesinde kalma
süresinin azaltılması gibi avantajlara sahiptir. Çalışmamızda üçüncü basamak
yoğun bakım ünitesinde seldinger yöntemiyle açtığımız perkütan trakeostomi
olgularınının  retrospektif   değerlendirmesi amaçlandı.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmamız retrospektif olarak
yapıldı. 15 Haziran 2016 - 30 Ağustos 2018 tarihleri ​​arasında perkütan
trakeostomi uygulanan  78 hastanın
kayıtları incelendi.  Girişim bölgesinde
cerrahi işlem uygulanmış, lokal enfeksiyonu olan, kısa boyunlu ve büyük tiroid
dokusuna sahip hastalar , morbid obez ve 18 yaşın altındaki hastalar çalışmaya
alınmadı.

Bulgular:
Çalışmamıza 78 hasta dahil edildi. YBÜ'de ortalama kalış süresi 39 gün;
ortalama trakeostomi süresi 16.3 gün saptandı.  Hastaların  yoğun bakım ünitesine en sık serebrovasküler
ve kardiyovasküler hastalıklar nedeniyle yatırıldığı görüldü. Dört hastada
trakeostomi sonrası hipotansiyon saptanırken, bir hastada yara enfeksiyonu ve
deri altı amfizemi tespit edildi.







Sonuç: Perkütan trakeostomi, uzun süre
mekanik ventilasyona ihtiyaç duyan hastalarda kısa sürede ve yatak başında  uygulanabilen kolay bir yöntemdir. Uzun süreli
entübasyon ve  mekanik ventilatör desteği
gereken  yoğun bakım hastalarında
sıklıkla kullanılan, yan etkileri azaltan, hasta konforunu artıran ve hasta
bakımını kolaylaştıran  bir yöntemdir.  Uygun hasta seçimi ve tecrübeli uzman hekim
tarafından uygulanması ile  komplikasyonlar
en aza indirilebilir.

Supporting Institution

yok

Thanks

yok

References

  • 1. Friedman Y. Percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy: The continuing saga. Crit Care Med 2006; 34(8): 2250-1
  • 2. Kost KM. Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy: a prospective evaluation of 500 consecutive cases. Laryngoscope 2005; 115: 1-30.
  • 3. Sağıroğlu AE, Ağkoç E, Doğan Y, et al. Comparison of percutaneus and surgical tracheos- tomy in ICU [Article in Turkish]. Göztepe Tıp Dergisi 2010;25:67–70
  • 4. Al-Ansari MA, Hijazi MH. Clinical review: percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Crit Care 2006; 10: 202.
  • 5. Cabrini L, Bergonzi PC, Mamo D, et al. Dilatative percutaneous tracheostomy during doub- le antiplatelet therapy: two consecutive cases. Minerva Anestesiol 2008; 74: 565-7.
  • 6. Friedman Y. Percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy: The continuing saga. Crit Care Med 2006; 34(8): 2250-1
  • 7. Rumbak MJ, Newton M, Truncale T,et al. A prospective, randomized, study comparing early percutaneous dilational tracheotomy to prolonged translaryngeal intubation (delayed tracheotomy) in critically ill medical patients. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 1689-94.
  • 8. Yıldırım F , Güllü YT, Demirel CB. Yoğun Bakımda Perkütan Trakeostomi. Eurasian J Pulmonol 2015 DOI: 10.5152/ejp.2014.27247.
  • 9. Zheng Y, Sui F, Chen XK, Zhang GC, et al. Early versus late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in critically ill patients anticipated requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012; 125: 1925-30
  • 10. Scales DC, Thiruchelvam D, Kiss A, et al. The effect of tracheostomy timing during critical illness on long-term survival. Crit Care Med 2008; 36: 2547-57.
  • 11. Terragni PP, Antonelli M, Fumagalli R, et al. Early vs late tracheotomy for prevention of pneumonia in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010; 303: 1483-9.

Evaluation of Percutaneous Tracheostomy Cases at An Tertiary Care Center Intensive Care Unit

Year 2019, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 245 - 249, 31.12.2019
https://doi.org/10.34084/bshr.647658

Abstract

Aim:
Percutaneous
tracheostomy is frequently performed in intensive care units, especially in
patients requiring long-term mechanical ventilatory support.  It has advantages such as providing safe
airway, facilitating the aspiration of the airways and reducing the length of
stay in the intensive care unit. In this study, we aimed to retrospectively
evaluate the percutaneous tracheostomy cases that we opened with the seldinger
method at a tertiary care center intensive care unit.

Materials
and Methods: Our study was performed retrospectively. The
records of 78 patients who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy between June 15,
2016 and August 30, 2018 were included. Patients with surgical and local
infection at the intervention site, short neck and large thyroid tissue,
cervical vertebra fracture or neck extension restriction, morbid obese and
patients under 18 years of age were excluded from the study.

Results:
78
patients were included in our study. the mean length of stay in the ICU was 39
days; mean duration of tracheostomy was 16.3 days. Most of the patients were
admitted to intensive care unit due to serbrovascular and cardiovascular
diseases. . Hypotension was detected in four patients after tracheostomy, while
wound infection and subcutaneous emphysema were found in one patient.







Conclusion:
Percutaneous
tracheostomy is an easy method that can be applied to bedside in a short time
in patients who need mechanical ventilation for a long time. Intubation and
prolonged mechanical ventilator is a useful method that is frequently used in
intensive care patients because it reduces side effects, improves patient
comfort and facilitates patient care. Complications can be minimized if
appropriate patient selection is performed by an experienced physician.

References

  • 1. Friedman Y. Percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy: The continuing saga. Crit Care Med 2006; 34(8): 2250-1
  • 2. Kost KM. Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy: a prospective evaluation of 500 consecutive cases. Laryngoscope 2005; 115: 1-30.
  • 3. Sağıroğlu AE, Ağkoç E, Doğan Y, et al. Comparison of percutaneus and surgical tracheos- tomy in ICU [Article in Turkish]. Göztepe Tıp Dergisi 2010;25:67–70
  • 4. Al-Ansari MA, Hijazi MH. Clinical review: percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Crit Care 2006; 10: 202.
  • 5. Cabrini L, Bergonzi PC, Mamo D, et al. Dilatative percutaneous tracheostomy during doub- le antiplatelet therapy: two consecutive cases. Minerva Anestesiol 2008; 74: 565-7.
  • 6. Friedman Y. Percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy: The continuing saga. Crit Care Med 2006; 34(8): 2250-1
  • 7. Rumbak MJ, Newton M, Truncale T,et al. A prospective, randomized, study comparing early percutaneous dilational tracheotomy to prolonged translaryngeal intubation (delayed tracheotomy) in critically ill medical patients. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 1689-94.
  • 8. Yıldırım F , Güllü YT, Demirel CB. Yoğun Bakımda Perkütan Trakeostomi. Eurasian J Pulmonol 2015 DOI: 10.5152/ejp.2014.27247.
  • 9. Zheng Y, Sui F, Chen XK, Zhang GC, et al. Early versus late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in critically ill patients anticipated requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012; 125: 1925-30
  • 10. Scales DC, Thiruchelvam D, Kiss A, et al. The effect of tracheostomy timing during critical illness on long-term survival. Crit Care Med 2008; 36: 2547-57.
  • 11. Terragni PP, Antonelli M, Fumagalli R, et al. Early vs late tracheotomy for prevention of pneumonia in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010; 303: 1483-9.
There are 11 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Clinical Sciences
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Cem Ece 0000-0002-5786-0525

Publication Date December 31, 2019
Acceptance Date November 28, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 3 Issue: 3

Cite

AMA Ece C. Evaluation of Percutaneous Tracheostomy Cases at An Tertiary Care Center Intensive Care Unit. J Biotechnol and Strategic Health Res. December 2019;3(3):245-249. doi:10.34084/bshr.647658

Journal of Biotechnology and Strategic Health Research