POINT: Tracheostomy in Patients With COVID-19: Should We Do It Before 14 Days? Yes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Brenner MJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7910662 | biostudies-literature | 2021 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
POINT: Tracheostomy in Patients With COVID-19: Should We Do It Before 14 Days? Yes.
Brenner Michael J MJ Feller-Kopman David D De Cardenas Jose J
Chest 20210227 5
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7910655 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8923527 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo analyse the effects of tracheostomy timing on COVID-19 outcomes by comparing mortality rates at different time points (7, 10 and 14 days).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Scopus were searched from 31 August 2023 to 6 September 2023.Primary and secondary outcomes measuresThe primary outcome was short-term mortality, defined as intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, hospital mortality and 28-day or 30-day mortality. The secondary outcomes included mechanical ventilation duration, ICU and hospital days.ResultsAmong 3465 patients from 12 studies, the 10-day subgroup analysis revealed higher mortality for earlier tracheostomy than for later tracheostomy (49.7% vs 32.6%, OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.37-2.65). No significant differences were observed at 7- and 14-day marks. Earlier tracheostomy was associated with shorter mechanical ventilation (mean difference=-7.35 days, 95% CI -11.63 to -0.38) and ICU stays (mean difference=-11.24 days, 95% CI -18.50 to -3.97) compared with later tracheostomy. Regarding hospital stay, the later tracheostomy group exhibited a trend towards longer-term inpatients, with no significant difference.ConclusionsNo significant difference in short-term mortality was observed between patients undergoing tracheostomy at 7 and 14 days; however, at 10 days, later tracheostomy resulted in a lower mortality rate. Accordingly, subtle timing differences may impact short-term results in COVID-19 patients. Considering that the later tracheostomy group had longer mechanical ventilation and ICU stays, additional research is required to determine an optimal timing that reduces mortality cost-effectively.
| S-EPMC11647386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSince the start of the COVID-19 pandemic 2019, quite a few patients became critical and needed ICU admission with ventilator assistance. Tracheostomy, which was initially performed late during the course of patient on ventilator, has now been considered a procedure that can be performed relatively early as this leads to early weaning of patients and overcomes the shortage of critical beds.ObjectiveThis study aims to focus on the outcomes of tracheotomised COVID-19 patients in terms of survival and any tracheostomy related morbidity.MethodsA prospective study was performed on COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy at this tertiary care teaching hospital, which also was a dedicated centre for treating COVID-19 patients. The duration of this study was from April 2020 to September 2021. Following tracheostomy, all patients were followed up regularly and clinical changes were recorded. Points that were specifically noted were timing of the tracheostomy, change in ventilator settings, tracheostomy related complications, requirement of oxygen, days needed to wean the patient, decanulation, and, if death, the cause of death.ResultsA total of 136 surgical open tracheostomies were performed on COVID-19 patients over the study period. The mean duration of intubation (timing of tracheostomy) was 12 days. A total of 73 out of 136 (53.6%) patients survived. 51 patients (37.5%) got decannulated during the course of the hospital stay. 9 patients were decanulated during the follow up visits and 13 patients were lost to follow up. 63 out of 136 (46.3%) patients died due to COVID pneumonia. Most of the patients who died had gone into multi-organ failure. Air leak syndromes (pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum) were common findings. 10 patients already had surgical emphysema before taking up for tracheostomy and 6 developed 2-3 days after tracheostomy. The most common complication was bleeding, which was seen in 28 out of 136 patients. The Median weaning of period of patients who survived was 5 days.ConclusionPerforming tracheostomy early in COVID-19 patients helps in early weaning of the patient from the ventilator and makes nursing care easier and increases the availability of ICU beds. The mortality rate was 46% amongst the 136 tracheostomies done in COVID-19 patients. Local site bleeding was the most common complication and surgical emphysema was also seen more than routine tracheostomies.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-022-03248-1.
| S-EPMC9665024 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this case series was to demonstrate that surgical tracheostomy can be undertaken safely in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and that it is an effective weaning tool.Study designRetrospective case series.SettingSingle academic teaching hospital in London.MethodsAll adult patients admitted to the adult intensive care unit (AICU), diagnosed with severe COVID-19 infection and requiring surgical tracheostomy between the March 10, 2020, and May 1, 2020, were included. Data collection focused upon patient demographics, AICU admission data, tracheostomy-specific data, and clinical outcomes.ResultsTwenty patients with COVID-19 underwent surgical tracheostomy. The main indication for tracheostomy was to assist in respiratory weaning. Patients had undergone mechanical ventilation for a median of 16.5 days prior to surgical tracheostomy. Tracheostomy remained in situ for a median of 12.5 days. Sixty percent of patients were decannulated at the end of the data collection period. There were no serious immediate or short-term complications. Surgical tracheostomy facilitated significant reduction in intravenous sedation at 48 hours after tracheostomy formation. There was no confirmed COVID-19 infection or reported sickness in the operating surgical or anesthetic teams.ConclusionSurgical tracheostomy has been demonstrated to be an effective weaning tool in patients with severe COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC7797581 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation can overwhelm existing bed capacity. We aimed to better understand the factors that influence the trajectory of tracheostomy care in this population to facilitate capacity planning and improve outcomes. METHODS:We conducted an observational cohort study of patients in a high-volume centre in the worst-affected region of the UK including all patients that underwent tracheostomy for COVID-19 pneumonitis ventilatory wean from 1st March 2020 to 10th May 2020. The primary outcome was time from insertion to decannulation. The analysis utilised Cox regression to account for patients that are still progressing through their tracheostomy pathway. RESULTS:At the point of analysis, a median 21 days (IQR 15-28) post-tracheostomy and 39 days (IQR 32-45) post-intubation, 35/69 (57.4%) patients had been decannulated a median of 17 days (IQR 12-20.5) post-insertion. The overall median age was 55 (IQR 48-61) with a male-to-female ratio of 2:1. In Cox regression analysis, FiO2 at tracheostomy???0.4 (HR 1.80; 95% CI 0.89-3.60; p?=?0.048) and last pre-tracheostomy peak cough flow (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.78-4.45; p?=?0.001) were independent variables associated with prolonged time to decannulation. CONCLUSION:Higher FiO2 at tracheostomy and higher pre-tracheostomy peak cough flow are associated with increased delay in COVID-19 tracheostomy patient decannulation. These finding comprise the most comprehensive report of COVID-19 tracheostomy decannulation to date and will assist service planning for future peaks of this pandemic.
| S-EPMC7395208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPercutaneous tracheostomy (PT) in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) included several critical steps associated with increased risk of aerosol generation. We reported a modified PT technique aiming to minimize the risk of aerosol generation and to increase the staff safety in COVID-19 patients.MethodsPT was performed with a modified technique including the use of a smaller endotracheal tube (ETT) cuffed at the carina during the procedure.ResultsThe modified technique we proposed was successfully performed in three critically ill patients with COVID-19.ConclusionsIn COVID-19 critically ill patients, a modified PT technique, including the use of a smaller ETT cuffed at the carina and fiber-optic bronchoscope inserted between the tube and the inner surface of the trachea, may ensure a better airway management, respiratory function, patient comfort, and great safety for the staff.
| S-EPMC7280702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients who require mechanical ventilation secondary to severe COVID-19 infection have poor survival. It is unknown if the benefit of tracheostomy extends to COVID-19 patients. If so, what is the optimal timing?MethodsRetrospective cohort study within a large hospital system in the United States. The population included patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020 to September 30, 2020. In total, 93,918 cases were identified. They were excluded if no intubation or tracheostomy, underwent tracheostomy before intubation, <18 years old, hospice patients before admission, and bacterial pneumonia. In total, 5,911 patients met the criteria. Outcomes between patients who underwent endotracheal intubation only versus tracheostomy were compared. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. All patients who underwent tracheostomy versus intubation only were compared. Three cohort analysis compared early (<10 days) versus late (>10 days) tracheostomy versus control. Eight cohort analysis compared days 0-2, days 3-6, days 7-10, days 11-14, days 15-18, days 19-22, and days 23+ to tracheostomy versus control.ResultsThere was an overall inpatient mortality rate of 37.5% in the tracheostomy cohort compared to 54.4% in the control group (P < .0001). There was an early tracheostomy group inpatient mortality rate of 44.7% (adjusted odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.52-1.01) compared to 33.1% (adjusted odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.34-0.58) in the late tracheostomy group.ConclusionCOVID-19 patients with tracheostomy had a significantly lower mortality rate compared to intubated only. Optimal timing for tracheostomy placement for COVID-19 patients is 11 days or later. Future studies should focus on early tracheostomy patients.
| S-EPMC9682058 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is a worldwide pandemic, with many patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Tracheostomy is not recommended by current guidelines as it is considered a superspreading event owing to aerosolization that unduly risks health care workers.MethodsPatients with severe COVID-19 who were on mechanical ventilation for 5 days or longer were evaluated for percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. We developed a novel percutaneous tracheostomy technique that placed the bronchoscope alongside the endotracheal tube, not inside it. That improved visualization during the procedure and continued standard mechanical ventilation after positioning the inflated endotracheal tube cuff in the distal trachea. This technique offers a significant mitigation for the risk of virus aerosolization during the procedure.ResultsFrom March 10 to April 15, 2020, 270 patients with COVID-19 required invasive mechanical ventilation at New York University Langone Health Manhattan's campus; of those, 98 patients underwent percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. The mean time from intubation to the procedure was 10.6 ± 5 days. Currently, 32 patients (33%) do not require mechanical ventilatory support, 19 (19%) have their tracheostomy tube downsized, and 8 (8%) were decannulated. Forty patients (41%) remain on full ventilator support, and 19 (19%) are weaning from mechanical ventilation. Seven patients (7%) died as a result of respiratory and multiorgan failure. Tracheostomy-related bleeding was the most common complication (5 patients). None of health care providers has had symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19.ConclusionsOur percutaneous tracheostomy technique appears to be safe and effective for COVID-19 patients and safe for health care workers.
| S-EPMC7182508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDecision-making in the timing of tracheostomy in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has centered on the intersection of long-standing debates on the benefits of early vs late tracheostomy, assumptions about timelines of infectivity of the novel coronavirus, and concern over risk to surgeons performing tracheostomy. Multiple consensus guidelines recommend avoiding or delaying tracheostomy, without evidence to indicate anticipated improvement in outcomes as a result.ObjectiveTo assess outcomes from early tracheostomy in the airway management of patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective medical record review was completed of 148 patients with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation at a single tertiary-care medical center in New York City from March 1 to May 7, 2020.InterventionsOpen or percutaneous tracheostomy.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were time from symptom onset to (1) endotracheal intubation, (2) tracheostomy; time from endotracheal intubation to tracheostomy; time from tracheostomy to (1) tracheostomy tube downsizing, (2) decannulation; total time on mechanical ventilation; and total length of stay.ResultsParticipants included 148 patients, 120 men and 28 women, with an overall mean (SD) age of 58.1 (15.8) years. Mean (SD; median) time from symptom onset to intubation was 10.57 (6.58; 9) days; from symptom onset to tracheostomy, 22.76 (8.84; 21) days; and from endotracheal intubation to tracheostomy, 12.23 (6.82; 12) days. The mean (SD; median) time to discontinuation of mechanical ventilation was 33.49 (18.82; 27) days; from tracheostomy to first downsize, 23.02 (13.76; 19) days; and from tracheostomy to decannulation, 30.16 (16.00; 26) days. The mean (SD; median) length of stay for all patients was 51.29 (23.66; 45) days. Timing of tracheostomy was significantly associated with length of stay: median length of stay was 40 days in those who underwent early tracheostomy (within 10 days of endotracheal intubation) and 49 days in those who underwent late tracheostomy (median difference, -8; 95% CI, -15 to -1). In a competing risks model with death as the competing risk, the late tracheostomy group was 16% less likely to discontinue mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.28).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study from the first 2 months of the pandemic in New York City provides an opportunity to reconsider guidelines for tracheostomy for patients with COVID-19. Findings demonstrated noninferiority of early tracheostomy and challenges recommendations to categorically delay or avoid tracheostomy in this patient population. When aligned with emerging evidence about the timeline of infectivity of the novel coronavirus, this approach may optimize outcomes from tracheostomy while keeping clinicians safe.
| S-EPMC7747038 | biostudies-literature