• Andreas I Gravvanis, Dimosthenis A Tsoutsos, Thomais G Iconomou, and Stefanos G Papadopoulos.
• Department of Plastic Surgery-Microsurgery and Burn Center, 154 Mesogion Avenue, Athens, 11527, Greece. gravvani@yahoo.com
• World J Surg. 2005 Dec 1;29(12):1571-5.

AbstractThe aim of the study was to compare conventional tracheostomy with percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in patients with inhalation burn injury. A total of 37 patients with severe burn injuries and associated inhalation injury, underwent percutaneous tracheostomy in our burn unit and were retrospectively compared with 22 patients who underwent conventional surgical tracheostomy. In the first group, 25 of 37 patients and in the second group 17 of 22 patients presented with partial or full-thickness burn injuries (or both) in the neck region. The cost of the procedure, operating time, complications, and incidence of pulmonary infection were recorded. There were no significant perioperative complications in the percutaneous tracheostomy group, and no patient required surgical revision or conversion to surgical tracheostomy. In the conventional tracheostomy group, 2 patients developed tracheal stenosis, 1 had a tracheoesophageal fistula, and 10 had stomal infections. The average procedure time in the first group was 9 minutes, and in the second group it was 22 minutes. The cost of the bedside percutaneous tracheostomy was one-fifth the cost of a conventional tracheostomy. The incidence of pulmonary sepsis was 45% after percutaneous tracheostomy compared to 68% after conventional tracheostomy. With the percutaneous technique, spontaneous closure of the stoma occurred within 1 to 3 days after removal of the tracheostomy tube, whereas with the conventional technique it was within 5 to 7 days. Percutaneous tracheostomy is associated with a lower complication rate and can be safely performed at the bedside. Moreover, it is faster and can be done at a lower cost than conventional open tracheostomy.

28 keywords...

hide…