 |
 |

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.
|
|
|
|
|
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]
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati 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 OtolaryngologyHead & Neck Surgery Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127(2):229-230.
FULL TEXT
|