• A Ravi Kumar, Sanjeev Mohanty, K Senthil, and M Gopinath.
• Dept of E.N.T. Head & Neck Surgery, SRMC & RI, Porur, 116 Chennai.
• Indian J Otolaryngol. 2005 Jul 1; 57 (3): 202-6.

ObjectiveTracheostomy is a one of the earliest described surgical procedure dating back to 2000 B.C. Percutaneous tracheostomy is becoming increasingly popular as an alternative method for conventional tracheostomy in the intensive care unit. In this study we compare the results of the use of these 2 techniques in 32 patients who underwent elective tracheostomy in the intensive care unit.Study DesignProspective randomized comparative study.SettingTertiary care hospital.PatientsAdult intubated patients selected randomly in the intensive care unit with normal cervical soft tissue, laryngeal framework, palpable cricoid cartilage and normal coagulation parameters.Results17 patients underwent conventional tracheostomy and 15 patients underwent percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Demographic data and duration of intubation comparable between two groups. The mean operative time, blood loss and complications were lower in percutaneous than in conventional tracheostomy.ConclusionsPDT is quicker to perform and has lower blood loss and complication rates compared to conventional tracheostomy. However percutaneous tracheostomy is not indicated in emergencies and in children. The cost of the percutaneous kit and use of bronchoscopy adds to the cost. It is a good alternative to conventional tracheostomy in properly selected patients.

1 keywords...

hide…