ArticleThe journal of extra-corporeal technology2020
Tracheostomy while on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Comparison of Percutaneous and Open Procedures.
Article in The journal of extra-corporeal technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Percutaneous vs. Surgical Tracheostomy: A Comparative Analysis of Efficiency, Cost, and Hospital Stay.Cureus · 2025Article
- Characteristics of patients requiring tracheostomy following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Timing of tracheostomy and patient outcomes in critically ill patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a single-center retrospective observational study.Journal of intensive care · 2022Article
- Academic Perfusion at Its Best and a New Tradition.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2020Article
- Staff experiences of percutaneous tracheostomy in intensive care: challenges, complications and potential solutions.Anaesthesia reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the ideal timing of tracheostomy for critically ill patients is controversial, transitioning from an endotracheal tube can be beneficial. Concerns arise for patients under extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. Studies have described percutaneous and open tracheostomy approaches for critically ill patients but, to our knowledge, have not compared the two specifically in ECMO patients. This study analyzed safety and aimed to identify if there was a difference in major bleeding or other tracheostomy-associated complications. A single-center retrospective cohort study of all patients who received tracheostomy while on ECMO from July 2013 to May 2019 was completed. The primary endpoint was a significant difference in the incidence of a major bleeding adverse event at 48 hours. Secondary endpoints included differences in the incidence of complications (e.g., procedure-related mortality, ECMO decannulation, tracheal/esophageal injury, and pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum) and survival to discharge. A secondary analysis separated the groups further by comparing those with bleeding events and those without. The study included 27 ECMO patients: 16 (59%) in the percutaneous arm and 11 in the open arm. The median number of ECMO days before tracheostomy was 10 vs. 13, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for major bleeding events (percutaneous 44% vs. open 27%,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.