MedElevator
Войти в исследования Archives of Iranian medicine · 2022
Accidental Foreign Body Aspiration Through Tracheostomy Inlet; 26 cases.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Eliçora Aykut, Sezer Hüseyin Fatih, Abdullayev Galbinur, Avcı Adil, Topçu Salih
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Foreign body aspiration from tracheostomy is very rare, and materials related to tracheostomy are usually aspirated. This condition, which can lead to serious complications, can be treated using bronchoscopic procedures. In this study, we aimed to present our clinical experience in foreign body aspiration via tracheostomy.
METHODS: Data from 26 patients who presented to our hospital for foreign body aspiration via tracheostomy from 2006 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively.
RESULTS: Foreign bodies were removed by fiber optic bronchoscopy in 15 (57.7%) cases, by rigid bronchoscopy in 9 (34.6%) cases and both methods were used in 2 (7.7%) cases. During bronchoscopy, local anesthetic procedures were used in 13 (50%) cases and general anesthesia was used in 11 (42.3%) cases. No anesthesia was used in two (7.7%) patients who underwent bronchoscopy under intensive care conditions. While the mean operative time for flexible bronchoscopy was 8.77±0.83 (CI: 26.03-29.43) minutes, the mean operative time for rigid bronchoscopy was 27.73±2.53 (CI: 26.03-29.43) minutes.
CONCLUSION: Both rigid bronchoscopy and fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) have advantages and disadvantages in foreign body removal. In our opinion, it is more reasonable to perform fiber optic bronchoscopy first in patients with a tracheostoma. In the light of our experiences, fiber optic bronchoscopy does not require general anesthesia and the operation time is shorter than rigid bronchoscopy. This feature makes fiber optic bronchoscopy advantageous.
METHODS: Data from 26 patients who presented to our hospital for foreign body aspiration via tracheostomy from 2006 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively.
RESULTS: Foreign bodies were removed by fiber optic bronchoscopy in 15 (57.7%) cases, by rigid bronchoscopy in 9 (34.6%) cases and both methods were used in 2 (7.7%) cases. During bronchoscopy, local anesthetic procedures were used in 13 (50%) cases and general anesthesia was used in 11 (42.3%) cases. No anesthesia was used in two (7.7%) patients who underwent bronchoscopy under intensive care conditions. While the mean operative time for flexible bronchoscopy was 8.77±0.83 (CI: 26.03-29.43) minutes, the mean operative time for rigid bronchoscopy was 27.73±2.53 (CI: 26.03-29.43) minutes.
CONCLUSION: Both rigid bronchoscopy and fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) have advantages and disadvantages in foreign body removal. In our opinion, it is more reasonable to perform fiber optic bronchoscopy first in patients with a tracheostoma. In the light of our experiences, fiber optic bronchoscopy does not require general anesthesia and the operation time is shorter than rigid bronchoscopy. This feature makes fiber optic bronchoscopy advantageous.