Our Percutaneous Tracheostomy Experience in Our Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Analysis
Abstract
Background: To retrospectively evaluate 58 patients who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy in our intensive care unit.
Materials and Methods: The study included 58 patients that underwent percutaneous tracheostomy in the ICU at our Anesthesiology and Reanimation department between January 2017 and December 2020.
Results: The percutaneous tracheostomy group comprised 33 (56.9%) men and 25 (43.1%) women with a mean age of 65±18.2 (range, 19-90) years. Most common primary diagnosis of hospitalization was neurological disorders (51.7%). Mean APACHE II score was 23.2±3.6, mean time to percutaneous tracheostomy was 18.3±5.1 (range, 7-30) days, mean procedural time was 11.1±2.4 min, mean duration of mechanical ventilation was 62.1±37.8 (range, 15-167) days, mean intensive care unit stay was 67.2±43.5 (range, 15-247) days, and mean hospitalization time was 77.5±50.4 (range, 15-277) days. Hypoxia and hypotension were the most common intraoperative complications and minor bleeding was the most common postoperative complication.
Conclusions: Performing early tracheostomy in intensive care unit patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation increases patient comfort, facilitates discontinuation of mechanical ventilation, reduces the dead space, facilitates the clearing of airway secretions, and shortens the duration of intensive care unit and hospital stay. Additionally, percutaneous tracheostomy was revealed as a safe procedure for intensive care unit patients due to its lower complication rates.
Keywords
References
- Referans1. Düger C, İsbir AC, Uysal İÖ, Kol İÖ, Kaygusuz K, Gürsoy S, et al. The evaluation of the complications of surgical and percutaneous tracheostomies in intensive care unit. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 2013;41:84-7. doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2013.31.
- Referans2. Pappas S, Maragoudakis P, Vlastarakos P, Assimakopoulos D, Mandrali T, Kandilotos D, et al. Surgical versus percutaneous tracheostomy: an evidence-based approach. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2011;268(3):323-30. doi: 10.1007/s00405-010-1398-5.
- Referans3. Sağıroğlu AE, Ağkoç E, Doğan Y, ve ark. Yoğun bakım ünitesinde perkütan ve cerrahi trakeostominin karşılaştırılması. Göztepe Tıp Dergisi 2010;25(2):67-70,2010 doi:10.5222/J.GOZTEPETRH.2010.067.
- Referans4. Ciaglia P, Firsching R, Syniec C. Elective percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. A simple bedside procedure; Preliminary report. Chest 1985;87(6):715-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.87.6.715.
- Referans5. Griggs WM, Worley LI, Gilligan JE, Thomas PD, Myburg JA. A simple percutaneous tracheostomy technique. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;170(6):543-545.
- Referans6. Ak K. Perkütan Trakeostomi. Tıp Araştırmaları Dergisi 2016:14(1):67-73.
- Referans7. Totoz T, Türk HŞ, Sayın P, Ünsal O, Çınar S, Oba S. Yoğun bakım ünitemizdeki (YBÜ) perkütan trakeotomi pratiğimiz. Ş.E.E.A.H. Tıp Bülteni 2013;47(1):11-5. doi: 10.5350/SEMB2013470103.
- Referans8. Akıncı SB, Kanbak M, Aypar Ü. Perkütan trakeostomi. Yoğun Bakım Dergisi 2003;3(3):149-59.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Clinical Sciences
Journal Section
Research Article
Publication Date
April 28, 2021
Submission Date
February 23, 2021
Acceptance Date
March 15, 2021
Published in Issue
Year 2021 Volume: 18 Number: 1
Cited By
Comparison of laryngeal mask airway and endotracheal tube using percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy
Anadolu Kliniği Tıp Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.21673/anadoluklin.1194680