0
Clinical Investigations in Critical Care |

A Meta-analysis of Prospective Trials Comparing Percutaneous and Surgical Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Patients*

Bradley D. Freeman, MD; Karen Isabella, RN; Natatia Lin, BS; Timothy G. Buchman, PhD, MD
Author and Funding Information

*From the Department of Surgery, Section of Burn, Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.

Correspondence to: Bradley D. Freeman, MD, Department of Surgery, Section of Burn, Trauma, Surgical Critical Care, Washington University School of Medicine, Suite 6104, Box 8109, St. Louis, MO 63110; e-mail: freemanb@msnotes.wustl.edu



Chest. 2000;118(5):1412-1418. doi:10.1378/chest.118.5.1412
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Study objectives: Tracheostomy is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the patient receiving long-term mechanical ventilation. While percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) is becoming increasingly utilized as an alternative to conventional surgical tracheostomy, most literature evaluating these two techniques is neither prospective nor controlled. We performed a meta-analysis of available prospective controlled studies comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients to more fully understand the relative benefits and risks of these two procedures in this population.

Design: Meta-analysis using Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model.

Interventions: We performed searches of MEDLINE, Current Contents, Best Evidence, Cochrane, and HealthSTAR databases from 1985 to present to identify prospective controlled studies comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients. After establishing clinical and statistical homogeneity (Q statistic), studies were analyzed by a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. For each clinical end point examined, PDT and surgical tracheostomy were compared by calculating either absolute differences or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous or discrete variables, respectively.

Measurements and results: We pooled data from five studies (236 patients) satisfying our search criteria to analyze eight clinical end points. Operative time was shorter for PDT than surgical tracheostomy: absolute difference with 95% CI, 9.84 min (7.83 to 10.85 min). There was no difference comparing PDT and surgical tracheostomy with respect to overall operative complication rates: OR with 95% CI, 0.732 (0.05 to 9.37). However, relative to surgical tracheostomy, PDT was associated with less perioperative bleeding (OR with 95% CI, 0.14 [0.02 to 0.39]), a lower overall postoperative complication rate (OR with 95% CI, 0.14 [0.07 to 0.29]), as well as a lower postoperative incidence of bleeding (OR with 95% CI, 0.39[ 0.17 to 0.88]), and stomal infection (OR with 95% CI, 0.02 [0.01 to 0.07]). No difference was identified in days intubated prior to tracheostomy (absolute difference with 95% CI, 0.16 days [− 0.9 to 1.22 days]), overall procedure-related complications (OR with 95% CI, 0.73 [0.06 to 9.37]), or death (OR with 95% CI, 0.63 [0.18 to 2.20]) comparing these two techniques.

Conclusions: Despite its popularity, there are currently only a limited number of small studies prospectively evaluating PDT and surgical tracheostomy. Our meta-analysis of these studies suggests potential advantages of PDT relative to surgical tracheostomy, including ease of performance, and lower incidence of peristomal bleeding and postoperative infection. If confirmed by additional, adequately powered prospective trials, these findings support PDT as the procedure of choice for the establishment of elective tracheostomy in the appropriately selected critically ill patient.

Figures in this Article

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
[Brachiocephalic trunk erosion by a tracheotomy cannula]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 1995;14(3):296-9.
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543