ArticleIndian journal of anaesthesia2022
Comparison of percutaneous tracheostomy methods in ICU patients: Conventional anatomical landmark method versus ultrasonography method - A randomised controlled trial.
Article in Indian journal of anaesthesia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus landmark- and bronchoscopy-guided techniques in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of ultrasound-guided versus anatomical landmark-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Pooled it
- Real-time ultrasound-guided laryngeal mask assisted percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Trial
- Complications of Percutaneous Tracheostomy-Assisting Techniques in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical outcomes and safety of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Effect of Morphological Structure on Dilatational Tracheostomy Interference Location and Complications with Ultrasonography and Fiberoptic Bronchoscopy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Optimising clinical outcomes with innovative research in the intensive care unit.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) is a common procedure in intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring long-term mechanical ventilation. PDT has gradually replaced surgical tracheostomy because it is associated with minimal invasiveness, reduced bleeding and simplicity in technique.This study was conducted to compare ultrasound-guided PDT versus conventional tracheostomy in terms of duration of the procedure, number of passes and immediate peri-procedural complications. Methods: A total of 72 patients with clinical indications of tracheostomy were recruited. A total of 12 patients met the exclusion criteria. The remaining were randomly assigned into two groups of 30 each: Group A (Landmark) with traditional anatomical landmark and Group B (USG) with real-time ultrasound guidance. Puncture positions were recorded with bronchoscopy. Midline deviation was captured on a bronchoscopy image using a protractor. Data on procedural safety and efficacy were also collected. Results: Group B had significantly fewer cases of midline deviation (11.33 ± 9.51) in comparison to Group A (16.60 ± 12.31). Trials > 2 were equal to 11 in Group A and 2 in Group B. However, the duration of the procedure was higher in Group B (20.07 ± 3.25 min) as compared to Group A (15.20 ± 3.71 min). Peri-procedural and post-procedural complications were also higher in the Landmark group. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided PDT showed superiority over landmark PDT in terms of less number of trials, midline puncture and fewer complications. However, it took a little longer to perform USG-guided PDT.
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.