ArticleJTCVS techniques2026
Safe (re)tracheostomy in critically ill patients with previous neck surgery using the minimally-invasive tracheostomy approach.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Published clinical data on minimally invasive tracheostomy (MIT) techniques in critically ill patients with prior neck surgery-particularly in the context of retracheostomy following surgical tracheostomy-remain limited. Generally, conventional percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy has not been recommended for such high-risk patients, owing to the potential for critical complications. Methods: This study presents data on MIT performed in 11 high-risk patients with previous neck surgery treated in a university hospital intensive care unit (ICU) specializing in hepatic and gastrointestinal diseases. Of note, all procedures were performed directly at the patient's bedside. Results: Eleven critically ill patients (age 56-75 years; 8 males and 3 females) with a previous history of neck surgery, including surgical tracheostomy (n = 7), neck dissection (n = 2), pharyngectomy (n = 1), and thymectomy (n = 1), underwent (re)tracheostomy to enable prolonged ventilation for inappropriate arousal or delayed weaning. Tracheostomy was performed exclusively via the MIT approach, the mainstay tracheostomy technique in our ICU. Specific risk factors for tracheostomy involved obesity (morbid obesity in 2 patients, with a body mass index of 43.0 and 71.0), cutaneous and tracheal scarring (n = 5), dense pretracheal vasculature (n = 3), postradiotherapy skin fibrosis (n = 1) and the presence of goiters (n = 2). In all patients, MIT was performed without complications, showcasing the safety of the MIT approach even in cervically preoperated high-risk patients. Conclusions: MIT could be used as a nonsurgical tracheostomy in ICUs in a wide spectrum of patients, including high-risk patients previously deemed ineligible for nonsurgical tracheostomy.
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.