Abstract

BACKGROUND: Traditional surgical teaching advocates converting emergency cricothyroidotomies to tracheostomies to mitigate the risk of subglottic stenosis. A conversion procedure that may risk losing a tenuous airway should have clear benefits over risks. We aimed to evaluate the necessity of routine cricothyroidotomy to tracheostomy conversion by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary literature.STUDY DESIGN: We performed a systematic review of experimental and observational studies (published between January 1, 2008, and March 1, 2021) reporting hospital outcomes of adults aged =18 years who underwent emergency cricothyroidotomies or tracheostomies. We followed PRISMA guidelines and assessed quality of data using GRADE methodology. Meta-analysis pooled incidence of procedure-specific complications (bleeding, subglottic stenosis, and others) using Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation and sensitivity analysis addressed survival bias.RESULTS: A total of 18 studies including 1246 patients were analyzed. Incidence of bleeding (5 [1 to 11]% vs 3 [1 to 7]%), subglottic stenosis (0 [0 to 3]% vs 0 [0 to 0]%) and other complications (12 [8 to 16]% vs 13 [5 to 23]%) were similar among patients undergoing emergency cricothyroidotomy or tracheostomy. Sensitivity analysis evaluating the incidence of complications among only survivors found similar results. Only one study reported complications attributable to cricothyroidotomy to tracheostomy conversion.CONCLUSIONS: Subglottic stenosis, the main harm conversion seeks to avoid, appears to be a rare complication after cricothyroidotomy. We did not find evidence supporting routine need to convert cricothyroidotomies to tracheostomies; for many patients, conversion is unlikely to rectify complications attributable to emergency cricothyroidotomy. However, our findings cannot be generalized to patients who require prolonged or permanent airway cannulation. Providers should consider performing cricothyroidotomy to tracheostomy selectively when the benefits clearly outweigh the risks of disrupting a secured airway.

View details for DOI 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000114

View details for PubMedID 35426409