Cargando…
Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens
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, trac...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467670/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26059328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1199-4 |
_version_ | 1782376399832612864 |
---|---|
author | AL-Qahtani, Khalid Adamis, Jon Tse, Jennifer Harris, Jeffery Islam, Tahera Seikaly, Hadi |
author_facet | AL-Qahtani, Khalid Adamis, Jon Tse, Jennifer Harris, Jeffery Islam, Tahera Seikaly, Hadi |
author_sort | AL-Qahtani, Khalid |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4467670 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44676702015-06-16 Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens AL-Qahtani, Khalid Adamis, Jon Tse, Jennifer Harris, Jeffery Islam, Tahera Seikaly, Hadi BMC Res Notes Research Article 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. BioMed Central 2015-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4467670/ /pubmed/26059328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1199-4 Text en © AL-Qahtani et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article AL-Qahtani, Khalid Adamis, Jon Tse, Jennifer Harris, Jeffery Islam, Tahera Seikaly, Hadi Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title | Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title_full | Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title_fullStr | Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title_full_unstemmed | Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title_short | Ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. A comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
title_sort | ultra percutaneous dilation tracheotomy vs mini open tracheotomy. a comparison of tracheal damage in fresh cadaver specimens |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467670/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26059328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1199-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alqahtanikhalid ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens AT adamisjon ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens AT tsejennifer ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens AT harrisjeffery ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens AT islamtahera ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens AT seikalyhadi ultrapercutaneousdilationtracheotomyvsminiopentracheotomyacomparisonoftrachealdamageinfreshcadaverspecimens |