5年重症监护室气管切开术经验

IF 0.3 Q4 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
T. Akbaş, E. Şenocak Taşçı, Esra Genc
{"title":"5年重症监护室气管切开术经验","authors":"T. Akbaş, E. Şenocak Taşçı, Esra Genc","doi":"10.37678/dcybd.2021.2893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Tracheostomy formation is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to analyze tracheostomy indications, complications and survival rates, and to compare characteristics and outcomes of patients who had undergone surgical tracheostomy (ST) and percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT). Methods: It was a prospective nonrandomized study conducted at a university hospital ICU. It included 88 consecutive adult patients receiving elective tracheostomy between September 2015 and February 2020. Results: The main indications for tracheostomy were prolonged mechanical ventilation, airway protection and pulmonary hygiene. The patients received a tracheostomy after a median of 17 (9-25) days of endotracheal intubation. Twenty-five percent of the patients were mobilized and 27% started oral feeding after tracheostomy. The survival rates at 28 days after tracheostomy, hospital discharge and 1 year were 64.8%, 40.9% and 15.9%, respectively. The ratio of the patients with ST was 36%. There were no differences in demographic data, comorbidity, admission diagnosis, complication rate, tracheostomy indication and survival rate between ST and PDT groups. Although duration of intubation before tracheostomy were similar between the groups, the time passed from informed consent for tracheostomy to the tracheostomy procedure was longer in the ST group (PDT, 3 [1-6]; ST, 6 [2-11] days; p=0.011). All ST patients had preoperative consultations from other clinics and the mean number of consultation per patient was 2.7. Conclusion: Both ST and PDT were safe procedures in the ICU. Since several consultations were requested, the implementation of the procedure was delayed for ST compared to PDT.","PeriodicalId":40137,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Five Year Experience of The Tracheostomy Procedure In a Medical Intensive Care Unit\",\"authors\":\"T. Akbaş, E. Şenocak Taşçı, Esra Genc\",\"doi\":\"10.37678/dcybd.2021.2893\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: Tracheostomy formation is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to analyze tracheostomy indications, complications and survival rates, and to compare characteristics and outcomes of patients who had undergone surgical tracheostomy (ST) and percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT). Methods: It was a prospective nonrandomized study conducted at a university hospital ICU. It included 88 consecutive adult patients receiving elective tracheostomy between September 2015 and February 2020. Results: The main indications for tracheostomy were prolonged mechanical ventilation, airway protection and pulmonary hygiene. The patients received a tracheostomy after a median of 17 (9-25) days of endotracheal intubation. Twenty-five percent of the patients were mobilized and 27% started oral feeding after tracheostomy. The survival rates at 28 days after tracheostomy, hospital discharge and 1 year were 64.8%, 40.9% and 15.9%, respectively. The ratio of the patients with ST was 36%. There were no differences in demographic data, comorbidity, admission diagnosis, complication rate, tracheostomy indication and survival rate between ST and PDT groups. Although duration of intubation before tracheostomy were similar between the groups, the time passed from informed consent for tracheostomy to the tracheostomy procedure was longer in the ST group (PDT, 3 [1-6]; ST, 6 [2-11] days; p=0.011). All ST patients had preoperative consultations from other clinics and the mean number of consultation per patient was 2.7. Conclusion: Both ST and PDT were safe procedures in the ICU. Since several consultations were requested, the implementation of the procedure was delayed for ST compared to PDT.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37678/dcybd.2021.2893\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Critical & Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37678/dcybd.2021.2893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:气管造口术是重症监护病房(ICU)最常见的外科手术之一。本研究旨在分析气管造口术的适应症、并发症和生存率,并比较手术气管造口术(ST)和经皮扩张气管造口术(PDT)患者的特点和预后。方法:在某大学医院ICU进行前瞻性非随机研究。该研究包括2015年9月至2020年2月期间连续88例接受择期气管切开术的成年患者。结果:气管切开术的主要适应证是延长机械通气、气道保护和肺部卫生。患者在平均17(9-25)天气管插管后接受气管切开术。25%的患者活动,27%的患者在气管切开术后开始口服喂养。气管切开术后28天、出院后1年生存率分别为64.8%、40.9%和15.9%。ST患者的比例为36%。ST组与PDT组在人口学资料、合并症、入院诊断、并发症发生率、气管造口指征及生存率方面无差异。虽然两组气管造口术前插管时间相似,但ST组从知情同意气管造口术到气管造口术的时间更长(PDT, 3 [1-6];ST, 6[2-11]天;p = 0.011)。所有ST患者术前均从其他诊所就诊,平均每位患者就诊次数为2.7次。结论:ST和PDT在ICU都是安全的手术。由于要求进行了几次协商,与PDT相比,ST程序的执行被推迟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Five Year Experience of The Tracheostomy Procedure In a Medical Intensive Care Unit
Objective: Tracheostomy formation is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the intensive care unit (ICU). This study aimed to analyze tracheostomy indications, complications and survival rates, and to compare characteristics and outcomes of patients who had undergone surgical tracheostomy (ST) and percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT). Methods: It was a prospective nonrandomized study conducted at a university hospital ICU. It included 88 consecutive adult patients receiving elective tracheostomy between September 2015 and February 2020. Results: The main indications for tracheostomy were prolonged mechanical ventilation, airway protection and pulmonary hygiene. The patients received a tracheostomy after a median of 17 (9-25) days of endotracheal intubation. Twenty-five percent of the patients were mobilized and 27% started oral feeding after tracheostomy. The survival rates at 28 days after tracheostomy, hospital discharge and 1 year were 64.8%, 40.9% and 15.9%, respectively. The ratio of the patients with ST was 36%. There were no differences in demographic data, comorbidity, admission diagnosis, complication rate, tracheostomy indication and survival rate between ST and PDT groups. Although duration of intubation before tracheostomy were similar between the groups, the time passed from informed consent for tracheostomy to the tracheostomy procedure was longer in the ST group (PDT, 3 [1-6]; ST, 6 [2-11] days; p=0.011). All ST patients had preoperative consultations from other clinics and the mean number of consultation per patient was 2.7. Conclusion: Both ST and PDT were safe procedures in the ICU. Since several consultations were requested, the implementation of the procedure was delayed for ST compared to PDT.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Critical & Intensive Care
Journal of Critical & Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信