Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31020401›Full record

ReviewLung2019

A Network Comparative Meta-analysis of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomies Using Anatomic Landmarks, Bronchoscopic, and Ultrasound Guidance Versus Open Surgical Tracheostomy.

Imran H Iftikhar, Stephanie Teng, Mathew Schimmel, Crystal Duran, Alejandro Sardi, Shaheen Islam

Abstract readComparative StudyReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Lung, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Early versus late tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Lung Sonography in Critical Care Medicine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Safety and feasibility of hybrid tracheostomy.Acute and critical care · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Imran H IftikharDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, 613 Michael St, NE, Atlanta, GA, USA. imran.hasan.iftikhar@emory.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5102-5193
Stephanie TengDepartment of Otolaryngology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA.
Mathew SchimmelDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, 613 Michael St, NE, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Crystal DuranDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA.
Alejandro SardiDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, 613 Michael St, NE, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Shaheen IslamDivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, GA, USA.
Augusta University · USEmory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral different tracheostomy techniques (percutaneous and surgical) have been studied extensively in previous direct pairwise meta-analyses. However, a network comparative meta-analysis comparing all has not been conducted before.

objectiveWe sought to compare three percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy techniques with open surgical tracheostomy technique (performed in the operating room or in the intensive care unit by bedside) in terms of their association with procedure-related major complications and procedure time. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed and Cochrane register of randomized active comparator trials. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A network comparative meta-analysis was performed in Stata using frequentist methodology. Major complications were defined as a composite of a priori-selected procedure-related complications. Tracheostomy techniques that did not require any direct bronchoscopic or ultrasonographic visualization of the entire procedure were grouped under the heading-anatomic landmark-based dilatational tracheostomy (ALDT). This along with bronchoscopic-guided dilatational tracheostomy (BDT), ultrasound-guided (UDT), and surgical tracheostomy (SGT) were compared with each other using network meta-analysis in Stata after all major assumptions (similarity, transitivity, and consistency) for performing a network were met. Log odds ratio (and standard errors) of the comparison of major complications between any two tracheostomy techniques (using indirect estimates) was statistically insignificant. Pairwise meta-analysis showed significant differences in procedure times between SGT and ALDT [mean difference: 9.96 min (SE 3.18)] and between SGT and BDT [15.67 min (SE 3.85)]. The indirect network meta-analysis comparing one versus the other also showed a statistically significant time difference between surgical tracheostomy when compared with every other technique.

conclusionsThe results of our network meta-analysis show that all tracheostomy techniques are comparable with respect to associated procedure-related complications, but all three percutaneous techniques take far less procedure time compared to the surgical tracheostomy.

Indexed as

Anatomic LandmarksBronchoscopyDilatationHumansIntensive Care UnitsOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsSurgery, Computer-AssistedTracheostomyUltrasonographyNetwork meta-analysisPercutaneous dilatational tracheostomySurgical tracheostomy

Identifiers

PMID31020401
OpenAlexW2941926335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.