Search

Background: Percutaneous tracheostomy placement is a common procedure performed in the intensive care unit. The use of an anterior neck ultrasound exam is routinely performed preprocedure, allowing for vessel visualization in determining the safety and feasibility of performing the procedure bedside. This prospective observational cohort study was conducted to determine whether vasculature in the anterior neck, seen on bedside ultrasound exam, contributes to bleeding complications during or after percutaneous tracheostomy (PCT) placement. Research Question: Do the vessels identified on preprocedure neck ultrasound affect the risk of bleeding during and after bedside PCT placement? Study Design and Methods: Preprocedural ultrasound was used to identify standard anatomical landmarks and vascular structures in the anterior neck in all patients undergoing bedside PCT placement under bronchoscopic guidance. A blinded survey of our recorded preprocedural images was provided to an expert panel who regularly perform bedside PCTs to determine the influence the images have on their decision to perform the procedure at the bedside. Results: One out of 15 patients (7%) had intra-operative minimal bleeding which was not clinically significant and resolved by gauze compression for 30 s. None of the patients had post-procedural bleeding after tracheostomy placement. Based on the blinded interpretation of neck ultrasound, there was 0.214 inter-operator variability among the expert panelists for decision-making regarding performing bedside PCT. Interpretation: Vessels visualized with anterior neck ultrasound were found to be small venous structures and did not significantly contribute to bleeding risk in patients who underwent PCT placement. The size and location of veins on neck ultrasound may commonly contribute to abandoning bedside PCT. This study suggests that veins measuring 3.9 mm or smaller identified at the site of access do not increase the risk of bleeding in PCT placement., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.