首页> 外文期刊>Journal of intensive care medicine >Comparison of Bronchoscopy-Guided and Real-Time Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy: Safety, Complications, and Effectiveness in Critically Ill Patients
【24h】

Comparison of Bronchoscopy-Guided and Real-Time Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy: Safety, Complications, and Effectiveness in Critically Ill Patients

机译:支气管镜引导下和实时超声引导下经皮扩张气管切开术的比较:危重患者的安全性、并发症和有效性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective: To compare the efficacy, safety, and incidence of complications between fiber-optic bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (FOB-PDT) and ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (US-PDT) and to determine whether US-PDT is a viable alternative to FOB-PDT. Methods: This randomized prospective study was carried out in 80 patients who were randomly divided into US-PDT and FOB-PDT groups. Demographic data and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), procedure duration, hemorrhage status, complications, procedure difficulty, displacement of entry location after US, and hemodynamic data were evaluated in both groups. Tracheal incision was performed with real-time US and a transverse probe position in the out-of-plane mode. Results: No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of demographic data, oral intubation time, APACHE II values, difficulty of the procedure, or the number of needle interventions ( P > .05). The mean hemorrhage ratio of the FOB-PDT group was significantly higher than that of the US-PDT group ( P < .05). The entry location was changed in 6 patients in the US-PDT group following neck examination with US. The mean duration of the procedure for the FOB-PDT group was significantly longer than that for the US-PDT group ( P < .05). Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is a safe procedure for critically ill patients and has the advantages of a low complication rate, short duration of procedure, being informative with regard to neck anatomy, and facilitating prevention of vascular puncture. Thus, US-PDT can be used as an alternative to FOB-PDT.
机译:目的:比较纤维支气管镜引导下经皮扩张气管切开术(FOB-PDT)与超声引导下经皮扩张气管切开术(US-PDT)的疗效、安全性和并发症发生率,并确定US-PDT是否是FOB-PDT的可行替代方法。方法:这项随机前瞻性研究在 80 例患者中进行,这些患者被随机分为 US-PDT 和 FOB-PDT 组。两组均评估人口统计数据和急性生理学和慢性健康评估 II (APACHE II)、手术持续时间、出血状态、并发症、手术难度、超声后进入位置的位移和血流动力学数据。气管切口采用实时超声和平面外模式的横向探头位置进行。结果:两组患者在人口统计学资料、口服插管时间、APACHE II值、手术难度、针头干预次数等方面差异无统计学意义(P>.05)。FOB-PDT组平均出血率明显高于US-PDT组(P < .05)。US-PDT 组 6 例患者颈部检查后进入部位发生变化。FOB-PDT组的平均手术时间明显长于US-PDT组(P < .05)。结论:超声引导下经皮扩张气管切开术对危重症患者是一种安全的手术,具有并发症发生率低、术程短、颈部解剖学信息丰富、有利于预防血管穿刺等优点。因此,US-PDT 可以用作 FOB-PDT 的替代品。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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