ArticleKorean journal of neurotrauma2022
Comparison of Conventional Surgical Tracheostomy and Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy in the Neurosurgical Intensive Care Unit.
Article in Korean journal of neurotrauma, 2022. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous tracheostomy procedures and patient results in a tertiary intensive care unit: A single-center experience.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Clinical outcomes and safety of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in patients with severe traumatic brain injury.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Preservation of Vocal Function in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) Patients Following Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy (PDT) and Adjuvant Therapies.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Tracheostomy Timing in Unselected Critically Ill Patients with Prolonged Intubation: A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of percutaneous single-stage dilatational tracheostomy and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients: A randomized controlled trial.International journal of critical illness and injury scienceArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Tracheostomy is a necessary procedure for patients admitted to the neurosurgery intensive care unit (ICU) with severe brain injury, because mechanical ventilation must be maintained for a long time following neurologic failure. The purpose of this study was to compare conventional surgical tracheostomy (CST) and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) performed at the bedside in critically ill neurosurgery patients requiring tracheostomy to determine which procedure has comparative advantages. Methods: This retprospective study was conducted between January 2019 and December 2020. PDT was performed on 52 patients and CST was performed on 44 patients. The baseline characteristics, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Results: The mean operative time in the CST group was 25.5±6.5 minutes and that in the PDT group was 15.1±2.5 minutes; the difference was statistically significant ( Conclusion: There were fewer procedure-induced complications among patients receiving PDT than among those receiving CST. In addition, the treatment time for PDT was shorter than that for CST treatment.
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.