You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 127 No. 2, February 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Clinical Challenges in Otolaryngology
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (2)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Percutaneous Tracheotomy: Is It Time to Reconsider Our Approach?

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:223-225.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Dr Bikhazi provides a nonbiased review of the literature regarding the status of percutaneous tracheotomy. He concludes that each surgeon must use the information to make his or her own decision regarding the safety and efficacy of this technique.


 
Figure appears in full text version.
Mary A. Fazekas-May, MD


Percutaneous tracheotomy is not a new technique but was first proposed by Sheldon et al1 in 1957. This technique involved blind cannulation of the trachea with a sharp-bladed instrument and did not achieve a great deal of popularity. In 1969, Toye and Weinstein2 advocated a single dilator technique. But it was not until 1985 when Ciaglia and colleagues3 described a progressive dilational technique over a Seldinger wire that the procedure achieved acceptance.

Controversy exists regarding the safety and efficacy of percutaneous tracheotomy. The literature is replete with studies documenting increased complications and mortality associated with percutaneous tracheotomy compared with standard open tracheotomy. The literature also contains a . . . [Full Text of this Article]



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

Percutaneous Tracheotomy: Has Its Time Arrived?
Nadim B. Bikhazi
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(2):221-223.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Percutaneous Tracheotomy May Be Useful in Both Surgical and Intensive Care Settings, but Is No Replacement for the Open Procedure
Donald T. Donovan
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(2):225-226.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(2):229-230.
FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.