• Theodore M Khalili, Wega Koss, Daniel R Margulies, Esther Morrison, and M Michael Shabot.
• Burns and Allen Research Institute, Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and the UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 90048, USA.
• Am Surg. 2002 Jan 1;68(1):92-4.

AbstractAlthough percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) has been advocated as an alternative to open tracheostomy (OT) its relative safety has been questioned repeatedly. This study prospectively compared the safety and complications of PDT and OT. Ninety-four patients underwent PDT and 252 patients underwent OT at this institution from December 1998 through April 2000 with the choice of procedure left to the operator. OT was performed in the operating room whereas PDT was performed in intensive care units (ICUs). PDT was performed by surgeons and medical intensivists under a strict institutional policy and procedure governing patient selection and conduct of the procedure. Complications were defined as bleeding, loss of airway, hypotension, hypoxia, tracheostomy tube malposition, subcutaneous emphysema, infection, and conversion of PDT to OT. All patients survived the operation. PDT and OT had similar complication rates: 2.1 per cent for PDT versus 2.8 per cent for OT (P = not significant). Postoperative bleeding, which was the most frequent complication, occurred in one PDT patient and four OT patients. One PDT patient required conversion to OT as a result of extensive tracheal fibrosis. Subcutaneous emphysema, soft-tissue infection, and a malpositioned tracheostomy tube were the remaining complications in the OT patients. We conclude that the complication rates of PDT and OT are comparable. The choice of PDT or OT should be dictated by the surgeon's training and experience, the patient's condition, neck anatomy, and stability for transfer to the operating room.

8 keywords...

hide…