Percutaneous tracheotomy: Forceps vs. cone dilatation techniques

Abstract

Background: Percutanoeous tracheotomy (PT) is a minimal invasive procedure alternative to surgical tracheotomy. PT offers an added advantage of enormous decrease of time interval between decision of doing tracheotomy and actually doing it. Moreover hazards of patient transport can be avoided as it can be safely performed at the bedside. We started doing PT in 2003 and performed 100 cases using forceps dilatation. Later we switched over to cone dilatation where we performed 215 cases. This study aims to compare two techniques of forceps vs. cone dilatation methods for PT. Methods: A total of 100 cases of PT were performed starting from December 2003 to August 2005 using the forceps dilatation method (group A). Further 215 cases were conducted (group B) from September 2003 to July 2008 using the cone dilatation method. Time of performing both procedures was recorded. Also incidence of complications was also recorded in both groups. Results: The incidence of minor bleeding in group A was 9%, whereas in group B was 5.58%. Major bleeding occurred in two patients in group B. Both cases suffered of pneumothorax and emphysema. One patient developed life-threatening tension pneumothorax and required cardio pulmonary resuscitation. This was one case in this series, in which the procedure has contributed to patient′s morbidity. Guide wire-related technical difficulties were seen in 2% of the cases in group A, and 3.7% of cases in group B. Conclusion: forceps dilatation PT is superior to the cone dilatation technique in terms of safety. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

Keywords

• Cone dilatation
• forceps dilatation
• percutaneous tracheotomy