首页> 外文期刊>The Laryngoscope: A Medical Journal for Clinical and Research Contributions in Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery, Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery .. >Bedside tracheostomy in the intensive care unit: a prospective randomized trial comparing open surgical tracheostomy with endoscopically guided percutaneous dilational tracheotomy.
【24h】

Bedside tracheostomy in the intensive care unit: a prospective randomized trial comparing open surgical tracheostomy with endoscopically guided percutaneous dilational tracheotomy.

机译:重症监护病房的床旁气管切开术:一项前瞻性随机试验,比较开放式气管切开术与内镜引导下经皮扩张气管切开术。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Objectives of the study were 1) to analyze the complication incidence and resource utilization of two methods of bedside tracheostomy and 2) to define selection criteria for bedside tracheostomy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective randomized trial in the setting of a tertiary care center at a university hospital. METHODS: One hundred sixty-four consecutive intubated patients selected for elective tracheostomy were enrolled. One hundred patients met selection criteria for bedside tracheostomy and were randomly assigned to either open surgical tracheostomy (50) or endoscopically guided percutaneous dilational tracheotomy(50). The remaining 64 patients received open surgical tracheostomies in the operating room. Main outcome measures were 1) perioperative and postoperative complication incidence and 2) resource utilization. RESULTS: Patients meeting our selection criteria for bedside tracheostomy had a significantly reduced perioperative complication rate compared with those who failed to meet these criteria, and subsequently underwent tracheostomy placement in the operating room (5% vs. 20%, P less than or equal to.01). No statistically significant difference was found in the perioperative complication incidence between the two methods of bedside tracheostomy. However, percutaneous tracheostomy placement at the bedside resulted in a significant increase in postoperative complication incidence (16% vs. 2%, P <.05) and incurred an additional patient charge of
机译:目的:本研究的目的是1)分析两种床旁气管切开术的并发症发生率和资源利用,以及2)定义床旁气管切开术的选择标准。研究设计:前瞻性随机试验,在大学医院的三级护理中心进行。方法:选择了164例行选择性气管切开术的连续插管患者。一百名患者符合床旁气管切开术的选择标准,并随机分配为开放式气管切开术(50)或内窥镜引导下经皮扩张气管切开术(50)。其余64例患者在手术室接受了开放式气管切开术。主要结局指标为:1)围手术期和术后并发症发生率; 2)资源利用。结果:符合我们选择床旁气管切开标准的患者与不符合这些标准的患者相比,围手术期并发症发生率显着降低,随后接受了在手术室中进行气管切开术的患者(5%vs. 20%,P小于或等于.01)。两种床旁气管切开术在围手术期并发症发生率上无统计学差异。然而,经皮气管造口术放置在床旁会导致术后并发症发生率显着增加(16%比2%,P <.05),并产生了额外的患者费用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号