A clinical and histologic comparison of percutaneous dilational versus conventional surgical tracheostomy

Laryngoscope. 1997 Dec;107(12 Pt 1):1643-6. doi: 10.1097/00005537-199712000-00012.

Abstract

To directly compare percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) with conventional surgical tracheostomy, a prospective study was performed in 83 patients requiring tracheostomy for prolonged mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit or after surgery for a large tumor in the upper respirodigestive tract. Median follow-up was 355 days after PDT and 338 days after conventional tracheostomy. The overall morbidity rate was significantly lower with PDT than with conventional tracheostomy (6.4% vs 36.1%; P < 0.001). Compared with conventional tracheostomy, PDT was also associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative bleeding (2.1% vs 13.9%; P < 0.05) and postoperative wound infection (0% vs 22.2%; P < 0.001). There were no clinical signs of laryngotracheal stenosis in either group. In conclusion, PDT is a simple, fast, safe bedside procedure that is associated with significantly lower morbidity than standard surgical tracheostomy.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Esophageal Neoplasms / pathology
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Humans
  • Intraoperative Complications
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasms, Multiple Primary / pathology
  • Neoplasms, Multiple Primary / surgery
  • Postoperative Complications
  • Prospective Studies
  • Trachea / surgery*
  • Tracheal Neoplasms / pathology
  • Tracheal Neoplasms / surgery*
  • Tracheostomy*