What do systematic reviews say?

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  0.52 [0.1, 2.6]
  4 studies · 257 participants
  Low

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

Percutaneous techniques showed no clear difference in intraoperative serious, life‐threatening adverse events compared with surgical techniques (low certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.93 [0.57, 1.53]
  12 studies · 1211 participants
  Low

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

Percutaneous techniques showed no clear difference in direct postoperative serious, life‐threatening adverse events compared with surgical techniques (low certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.72 [0.41, 1.25]
  10 studies · 984 participants
  Low

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

Percutaneous techniques probably leads to lower wound infection/stomatitis compared with surgical techniques (moderate certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.24 [0.15, 0.37]
  12 studies · 936 participants
  Moderate

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

Percutaneous techniques may leads to lower unfavourable scarring compared with surgical techniques (low certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.25 [0.07, 0.91]
  6 studies · 789 participants
  Low

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

It is very uncertain whether percutaneous techniques changes major bleeding compared with surgical techniques (very low certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.7 [0.45, 1.09]
  10 studies · 984 participants
  Very low

Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques

Percutaneous techniques showed no clear difference in tracheostomy tube occlusion/obstruction, accidental decannulation,… compared with surgical techniques (low certainty).

• Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.36 [0.65, 2.82]
  6 studies · 538 participants
  Low

LMA vs endotracheal tube (ETT)

• Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill adults 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 40 participants
  Very low

LMA vs endotracheal tube (ETT)

• Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill adults 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  5 studies · 281 participants
  Very low

LMA vs endotracheal tube (ETT)

It is very uncertain whether laryngeal mask airway (LMA) changes tally of participants with one or more serious adverse event(s)… compared with endotracheal tube (ETT) (very low certainty).

• Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill adults 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.86 [0.41, 1.8]
  8 studies · 467 participants
  Very low

LMA vs endotracheal tube (ETT)

• Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill adults 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  6 studies · 324 participants
  Low

LMA vs endotracheal tube (ETT)

Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) may leads to higher failure of procedure, requiring conversion to any other procedure compared with endotracheal tube (ETT) (low certainty).

• Laryngeal mask airway versus endotracheal tube for percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill adults 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.82 [1.22, 6.52]
  8 studies · 439 participants
  Low