ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
CT-Based Comparison of Tracheostomy Placement Accuracy: Open Versus Percutaneous Approaches.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- CT-Based Comparison of Tracheostomy Placement Accuracy: Open Versus Percutaneous Approaches.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate stoma placement accuracy using computed tomography (CT) in patients undergoing open surgical (OST) versus percutaneous dilational (PDT) tracheostomy, and identify factors associated with high placement.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed adults who underwent OST or PDT at a tertiary center (July 2012-July 2024) with CT imaging ≤ 30 days post-procedure. The primary outcome was vertical distance from the inferior cricoid border to cannula center (mm). Placement was classified as high (≤ 10 mm) or non-high (> 10 mm). Multivariate regression identified predictors. Subgroup analysis was performed for otolaryngology cases.
resultsOf 503 patients (mean age 59.5 ± 18 years, 69.2% male), 421 (83.7%) underwent PDT and 82 (16.3%) OST. Mean distance was 12.6 ± 9.3 mm, shorter in PDT than OST (mean difference -2.4 mm; 95% CI: -4.6 to -0.2; p = 0.03), with no difference in high placement rates (37.1% vs. 31.7%; p = 0.36). Independent predictors of shorter distance were older age, higher BMI, general surgery team, and larger cannula diameter. Female gender was associated with greater distance. Predictors of high placement included older age, higher BMI, and larger cannula diameter. In the otolaryngology-only subgroup (n = 189), no differences in distance (mean difference 1.6 mm; 95% CI: -0.9 to 4.2; p = 0.22) or high placement rates were observed between groups; BMI was not associated with placement.
conclusionsTechnique alone did not determine high placement; patient factors, team, and cannula size were more influential. When performed by otolaryngologists, PDT achieves placement comparable to OST. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.