Safety Of Tracheostomy Research Articles

Safety and Outcomes of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background/Objectives: Patients with hematologic malignancy (HM) often experience high rates of thrombocytopenia, thrombocytopathy, anemia, leukopenia, and coagulopathy, which can significantly increase the risk of procedural and postoperative complications. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) in critically ill patients with HM. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients with HM who underwent PDT between 2012 and 2023 at a tertiary academic center. The primary outcome was early (7-day) bleeding complications rate. Secondary outcomes included PDT-related mortality, and mortality at 1 week, 30 days, and 1 year. Analyses were performed using a propensity-matched cohort to ensure balanced comparisons between groups. Results: Of the 1627 patients included in the analysis, 65 (4%) had HM. Patients with HM had a significantly higher Charlson comorbidity index and exhibited significantly higher rates of thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 100,000/mcL) compared to those without HM (8.0 [IQR 5.0-11.3] vs. 5.0 [IQR 2.0-7.0], p < 0.001; and 49.2% vs. 5.0%, p < 0.001, respectively). After propensity score matching, the one-week mortality rate was significantly higher in the HM group (23.4% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.007). However, the rates of intraoperative and bleeding complications as well as one-year mortality rates were similar between the groups. Conclusions: PDT can be safely performed in critically ill patients with HM. However, these patients exhibit high early mortality rates following the procedure.

The Safety of Pediatric Bedside Tracheostomy.

Traditionally, pediatric tracheostomy has been viewed as a technically demanding procedure with a high complication rate, requiring the routine use of a formal operating room. Pediatric bedside tracheostomy in an intensive care unit (ICU) setting has not been widely reported, in contrast to the widespread adult bedside ICU tracheostomy. Transport of these critically ill, multiple life support systems dependent patients can be technically difficult, labor intensive, and potentially risky for these patients. Our study aimed to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of bedside tracheostomy in the pediatric ICU. A retrospective analysis of all pediatric patients undergoing tracheostomy at a tertiary care center, between 1st of January 2013 and 31st of December 2019. During the study period, 117 pediatric patients underwent tracheostomy, 57 (48.7%) were performed bedside while 60 (51.3%) were performed in the operating room. Patients' ages ranged from 2 weeks to 17 years of age, with a median age of 16 months. No case of bedside tracheostomy necessitated a shift to the operating room. There was no difference in 30-day morbidity and mortality between the 2 groups. Our results suggest that pediatric open bedside tracheostomy in an ICU setting is a safe procedure, with similar complications and outcomes compared to tracheostomy performed in the operating room.

Impact of Early Tracheostomy After Lung Transplantation: A National Analysis

BackgroundProlonged mechanical ventilation is common among lung transplant recipients, affecting nearly one-third of patients. Tracheostomy has been shown as a beneficial alternative to endotracheal intubation, but delays in tracheostomy tube placement persist. To date, no large-scale study has investigated the effect of tracheostomy timing on posttransplant outcomes. MethodsAll adults receiving tracheostomy after primary, isolated lung transplantation were identified in the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Early tracheostomy was defined as placement before postoperative day 8 based on exploratory cohort analysis. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association of early tracheostomy with in-hospital mortality, select posttransplant complications, and resource utilization. ResultsOf an estimated 11,048 patients undergoing first-time lung transplantation, 1509 required a tracheostomy in the postoperative period, with 783 (51.9%) comprising the early cohort. After entropy balancing and risk adjustment, early tracheostomy placement was associated with reduced odds of death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.97) and posttransplant infection (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35-0.82). Further, tracheostomy within 1 week of transplantation was associated with decreased length of stay (β-coefficient, −16.5 days; 95% CI, −25.3 to −7.6 days) and index hospitalization costs (β-coefficient, −$97,600; 95% CI, −$153,000 to −$42,100). ConclusionsThe present study supports the safety of early tracheostomy among lung transplant recipients and highlights several potential benefits. Among appropriately selected patients, tracheostomy placement before postoperative day 8 may facilitate early discharge, lower costs, and reduced odds of posttransplant infection.

Safety and efficacy of high tracheostomy with inferior retraction of the thyroid isthmus

ObjectiveIn typical surgical tracheostomy, the thyroid isthmus is divided or retracted superiorly and preserved. However, at our institution, the thyroid isthmus is retracted inferiorly and preserved. Thereafter, a tracheal incision is made above the thyroid isthmus. This method, hereinafter defined as high tracheostomy, has the advantage of facilitating immediate access to the trachea in a superficial position; moreover, it can be quickly replaced with cricothyrotomy in emergency situations. However, tracheotomies placed too high can potentially damage the cricoid cartilage, thereby causing subglottic granulation and tracheal stenosis. We aimed to validate the safety and efficacy of high tracheostomy with inferior retraction of the thyroid isthmus. MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort analysis. We analyzed the operative method and other relevant characteristics of 90 patients who underwent surgical tracheostomy between April 2016 and June 2022. For those who underwent high tracheostomies, we analyzed the duration of surgery, amount of intraoperative bleeding, occurrence of complications, problems with stoma closure, and perioperative mortality. ResultsHigh tracheostomy was performed in 73 patients. Subglottic granulation occurred in one patient, and the granulation tissue spontaneously shrank. Subcutaneous emphysema occurred in two patients. No patient developed wound infection or tracheoinnominate artery fistula. Moreover, no patient experienced false route tracheotomy tube insertion because the thyroid glands were located under the stoma. ConclusionThe frequency of complications was comparable to that reported in other studies on tracheostomy. Additionally, no patient developed tracheal stenosis secondary to tracheostomy above the thyroid isthmus. Therefore, high tracheostomy with inferior retraction and preservation of the thyroid isthmus is safe and advantageous.

A 30-day Survival and Safety of Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Moderate-to-severe COVID-19 Pneumonia Patients: A Single-center Experience.

In coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia, guidelines on timing and method of tracheostomy are evolving. The aim of the study was to analyze the outcomes of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients who required tracheostomy and the safety with regard to the risk of transmission to the healthcare workers. We retrospectively analyzed 30-day survival outcome of a total of 70 moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients on a ventilator, wherein tracheostomy was performed only in 28 (tracheostomy group), and the remaining were with endotracheal intubation beyond 7 days (non-tracheostomy group). Besides demographics, comorbidities and clinical data including 30-day survival and complications of tracheostomy were analyzed in both groups with respect to the timing of tracheostomy from the day of intubation. Healthcare workers were monitored for COVID-19 symptoms by carrying out periodical COVID tests. The 30-day survival of the tracheostomy group was 75% as compared to 26.2% of the non-tracheostomy group. The majority of the patients (71.4%) had severe disease with PaO2/FiO2 (P/F ratio) <100. The first wave showed an 80% (4/5) while the second wave 100% (8/8) thirty days survival in the tracheostomy group performed before 13 days. All patients during the second wave underwent tracheostomy before 13 days with a median of 12th day from the day of intubation. These tracheostomies were performed percutaneously at the bedside, without any major complications and no transmission of disease to healthcare workers. Early percutaneous tracheostomy within 13 days of intubation demonstrated a good 30-day survival rate in severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients. Shah M, Bhatuka N, Shalia K, Patel M. A 30-day Survival and Safety of Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Moderate-to-severe COVID-19 Pneumonia Patients: A Single-center Experience. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(10):1120-1125.

Bleeding Hazard of Percutaneous Tracheostomy in COVID-19 Patients Supported With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Case Series

ObjectivesTracheostomy is usually performed to aid weaning from mechanical ventilation and facilitate rehabilitation and secretion clearance. Little is known about the safety of percutaneous tracheostomy in patients with severe COVID-19 supported on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). This study aims to investigate the bleeding risk of bedside percutaneous tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 infection supported with VV-ECMO.DesignA Retrospective review of electronic data for routine care of patients on ECMO.SettingTertiary, university affiliated national ECMO centre.ParticipantsCOVID-19 patients who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy while on VV-ECMO support.InterventionsNo intervention was conducted during this study. Measurements and Main Results: Electronic medical records of 16 confirmed COVID-19 patients who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy while on VV-ECMO support, including patient demographics, severity of illness, clinical variables, procedural complications, and outcome were compared with 16 non-COVID-19 cases. SPSS statistical software was used for statistical analysis. Demographic data were compared using the chi-square test and normality assumption was test using Shapiro-Wilk test. The indications for tracheostomy in all the cases were prolonged mechanical ventilation and sedation management. None of the patients suffered a life-threatening procedural complication within 48 hours. Moderate to severe bleeding was similar in both groups. There was no difference in 30 and 90-days mortality between both groups. As per routine screening results, none of the staff involved contracted COVID-19 infection.ConclusionsIn this case series percutaneous tracheostomy during VV-ECMO in COVID-19 patients appeared to be safe and did not pose additional risks to patients or healthcare workers.

A Retrospective Observational Case Study to Assess the Safety and Feasibility of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy Performed by Trainees

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is a procedure commonly performed in patients requiring prolonged ventilatory care in intensive care unit. In this procedure, a tracheal tube is inserted in the anterior tracheal wall between the second and third tracheal rings using seldinger’s approach. There have been many studies that proved the efficiency and associated complications of PDT, but not many have compared the safety and feasibility of PDT performed by trainees and intensivist. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and feasibility of PDT by trainees. The primary objective is to compare the duration of performing PDT by trainees and intensivists and complications associated with it. This is a retrospective observational study done on patients who underwent PDT between January 2020 till June 2020 in our institute. The data collected retrospectively were categorized into two groups. One group consisted of PDT done by trainees and the other group where PDT was performed by intensivists. On analysis, the results showed a significant difference, in the duration of performing PDT between trainees and intensivist, with p = 0.001. However, there weren’t any differences in other study parameters like demographics and complication rate. It is thus, concluded that PDT performed by trainees although, a little time consuming than those performed by intensivists, was evaluated to be safe and feasible without any complications.

Tracheostomy Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion With Plating in Trauma Patients: Is It Safe?

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and necessity of tracheostomy after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with plating, despite the close proximity of the two surgical skin incisions. Sixty-three patients with traumatic cervical fractures or spinal cord injury (SCI) who underwent single-level ACDF and plating between January 2014 and June 2019 were included in this study. The patients included 45 men and 18 women, with a mean age of 48.5 years. A retrospective analysis of the patients' demographic data, level of injury, radiological findings, and neurological status was performed based on the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA), open tracheostomy, and decannulation rate. Additionally, risk factors necessitating tracheostomy were statistically analyzed. Eighteen patients (28.5%) required subsequent open tracheostomy. Among them, 11 patients were successfully decannulated, four patients could not be decannulated during the follow-up period, and three patients died of unrelated complications. The median interval from ACDF with plating to open tracheostomy was 9.6 days (range, 5-23 days). On the basis of neurological status, ASIA A and B patients (p<0.001), high signal intensity on T2-weighted-magnetic resonance (MR) images (p=0.001), and major cervical fracture and dislocation were significant risk factors for tracheostomy (p=0.02). No patient showed evidence of significant soft tissue, bony infection, or nonunion during the follow-up period. Independent tracheostomy did not increase the risk of infection or nonunion despite the close proximity of the two surgical skin incisions.

Safety and feasibility of hybrid tracheostomy.

BackgroundPercutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) is widely used in intensive care units, but this conventional method has some disadvantages, such as requirement of a lot of equipment and experts at the site. Especially, in situations where the patient is isolated due to an infectious disease, difficulties in using the equipment may occur, and the number of exposed persons may increase. In this paper, we introduce hybrid tracheostomy that combines the advantages of surgical tracheostomy and PDT and describe our experiences.MethodsData from 55 patients who received hybrid tracheostomy without bronchoscopy from January 2020 to February 2021 were collected and reviewed retrospectively. Hybrid tracheostomy was performed at the bedside by a single thoracic surgeon. The hybrid tracheostomy method was as follows: after the skin was incised and the trachea was exposed, only the extent of the endotracheal tube that could not be removed was withdrawn, and then tracheostomy was performed by the Seldinger method using a PDT kit.ResultsThe average age was 66.5 years, and the proportion of men was 69.1%. Among the patients, 21.8% were taking antiplatelet drugs and 14.5% were taking anticoagulants. The average duration of the procedure was 13.3 minutes. There was no major bleeding, and there was one case of paratracheal placement of the tracheostomy tube.ConclusionsIn most patients, the procedure can be safely performed without any major complications. However, patients with a short neck, a neck burn or patients who have received radiation therapy to the neck should be treated with conventional methods.

974 Improving Safety for Tracheostomy and Laryngectomy Patients Within A Regional Head and Neck Unit

Abstract Aim To improve the safety of tracheostomy and laryngectomy patients within a UK-based regional head and neck unit. Method This audit was conducted against standards taken from the National Tracheostomy Safety Project (NTSP). Inclusion criteria were all patients with a tracheostomy or laryngectomy on the ward, there were no exclusion criteria. Data was collected per inpatient episode for a one month period pre- and post- implementation of each intervention (1st March to 31st May 2020). Results Pre-intervention results showed that none of the 19 neck-breathing inpatients during March 2020 had a bedhead sign or emergency algorithm displayed, however all patients had required bedside equipment and the only unavailable ward equipment was capnography. Laminated bedhead signs and algorithms were implemented and 33% neck-breathing patients had signs displayed during April 2020. Further intervention in May 2020 to educate ward staff led to 90% of patients having a bedhead sign displayed and 80% having an algorithm displayed. Conclusions Overall, our unit has very high standards of care for neck-breathing patients. The use of bedhead signs and emergency airway algorithms is an integral part of providing safe care for neck-breathing patients and all members of staff are responsible for their use. The COVID-19 crisis has impacted on the number of elective procedures being performed which has impacted upon the numbers for the post-intervention arms of our audit. Reduced staffing due to sickness during the pandemic may have contributed to the substandard results.

Safety of surgical tracheostomy under continued antithrombotic therapy: A retrospective cohort study

Although various guidelines have been established for the management of antithrombotic therapy during surgical treatments, surgical tracheostomy (ST) under continued antithrombotic therapy (CAT) remains challenging. Here, we investigated the risk factors for complications after ST by focusing on the application of CAT during ST. A retrospective cohort study with medical records from 2009 to 2020. A single-center study. This study included patients who had undergone ST at the Department of Otolaryngology of our hospital MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the incidence of complications and blood test results. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for postoperative complications. We identified 288 patients (median age: 64 years; 184 men [64%]), among whom 40 (median age: 67 years; 29 men [73%]) underwent CAT. Although the patients undergoing CAT had significantly longer activated partial thromboplastin time (p=0.002) and a higher prothrombin time-international normalized ratio (p=0.006) compared to antithrombotic naïve patients, no statistically significant intergroup differences were observed for the risk of bleeding, infection, or subcutaneous emphysema. Instead, ST under local anesthesia (p=0.01) and ST for airway emergency (p=0.02) significantly increased the risk of early postoperative complications. These results suggest that ST under CAT can be safely performed without any increased risk of postoperative complications. Nevertheless, surgeons should be extra cautious about early complications after ST under local anesthesia without intubation or ST for airway emergencies.

Use of early puncture-dilatational tracheostomy in case of transferring patients with acute cerebral circulation disorder and new coronavirus infection COVID-19 to artificial lung ventilation

Objective. To assess the use, safety and effectiveness of puncture-dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) performed immediately after the tracheal intubation in patients with cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and new coronavirus infection (NCI).&#x0D; Materials and methods. Patients with CVA and NCI treated at ICU underwent PDT using the Ultraperc kit according to the Ciaglia technique immediately after the tracheal intubation.&#x0D; Results. The results of treatment of 12 patients with CVA and 21 patients with NCI were investigated, the safety of manipulation, treatment results, and mortality in groups were evaluated.&#x0D; Conclusions. The puncture-dilatational tracheostomy, performed as early as possible, allows improving disease outcomes in CVA, facilitating patients care, and ensuring greater safety of patients and staff.

Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to hypoxemic respiratory failure resulting in prolonged mechanical ventilation. Typically, tracheostomy is considered in patients who remain ventilator dependent beyond 2 weeks. However, in the setting of this novel respiratory virus, the safety and benefits of tracheostomy are not well-defined. Our aim is to describe our experience with percutaneous tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19. This is a single center retrospective descriptive study. We reviewed comorbidities and outcomes in patients with respiratory failure due to COVID-19 who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy at our institution from April 2020 to September 2020. In addition, we provide details of our attempt to minimize aerosolization by using a modified protocol with brief periods of planned apnea. A total of 24 patients underwent percutaneous tracheostomy during the study. The average body mass index was 33.0±10.0. At 30 days posttracheostomy 17 (71%) patients still had the tracheostomy tube and 14 (58%) remained ventilator dependent. There were 3 (13%) who died within 30 days. At the time of data analysis in November 2020, 9 (38%) patients had died and 7 (29%) had been decannulated. None of the providers who participated in the procedure experienced signs or symptoms of COVID-19 infection. Percutaneous tracheostomy in prolonged respiratory failure due to COVID-19 appears to be safe to perform at the bedside for both the patient and health care providers in the appropriate clinical context. Morbid obesity did not limit the ability to perform percutaneous tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients.

Comparing the Outcomes of Early and Late Tracheostomy in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Patient.

BackgroundPatients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) were expected to have poor Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) recovery and prolonged intubation. Therefore, an early tracheostomy procedure was indicated for all severe TBI. In view of growing concern regarding the safety and outcome of early tracheostomy on these patients, it was deemed valid and needed to be addressed.MethodsThis study was conducted to compare the outcomes of early and late tracheostomies in severe TBI. Only severe TBI patients who were admitted to the Neurosurgery High Dependency Unit (NHDU), Hospital Sultanah Aminah (HSA), Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia and who had underwent a tracheostomy were recruited. Three main outcomes noted: duration on ventilation, length of NHDU stay and rate of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP).ResultsOut of 155 patients, 72 (46.5%) were in early tracheostomy group (ETG) and 83 (53.5%) were in late tracheostomy group (LTG). The majority of the participants, 95 (61.3%) were ethnic Malays. The mean duration on ventilator use was 2.65 days (1.57) for ETG and 5.63 days (2.35) for LTG. While, mean NHDU stay was 4.75 days (1.98) for ETG and 9.77 days (2.70) for LTG. Upon independent t-test, early duration of tracheostomies had shown significant outcome in reducing length of NHDU stay, (P < 0.001) and had shortening participants’ time on mechanical ventilator (P < 0.001). Then, based on forward multiple logistic regression test, there were significant association between comorbid (P = 0.003) and tracheostomy (P = 0.020) towards presence of VAP when adjusted for other variables.ConclusionIn this study it was found that early tracheostomy was significant in shortening the duration on ventilator, reducing the length of NHDU stay and reducing the rate of VAP.

The role of routine FIBERoptic bronchoscopy monitoring during percutaneous dilatational TRACHeostomy (FIBERTRACH): a study protocol for a randomized, controlled clinical trial

BackgroundTracheostomy is one of the most frequent techniques in intensive care units (ICU). Fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB) is a safety measure when performing a percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT), but the controversy surrounding the routine use of FB as part of the procedure remains open. National surveys in some European countries showed that the use of FB is non-standardized. Retrospective studies have not shown a significant difference in complications between procedures performed with or without a bronchoscope. International guidelines have not been able to establish recommendations regarding the use of FB in PDT due to lack of evidence.DesignThis is a multicenter (three centers at the time of publishing this paper) randomized controlled clinical trial to examine the safety of percutaneous tracheostomy using FB. We will include all consecutive adult patients admitted to the ICU in whom percutaneous tracheostomy for prolonged mechanical ventilation is indicated and with no exclusion criteria for using FB. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive blind PDT or PDT under endoscopic guidance. All procedures will be performed by experienced intensivists in PDT and FB. A Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) will monitor the trial. The primary outcome is the incidence of perioperative complications.DiscussionFB is a safe technique when performing PDT although its use is not universally accepted in all ICUs as a routine practice. Should PDT be monitored routinely with endoscopic guidance? This study will assess the role of FB monitoring during PDT.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04265625. Registered on February 11, 2020

A Study on the Safety of Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Novel Corona Virus 2 (SARS-nCoV2) Infection: A Single-Center Observational Cohort Study in a CoVID Intensive Care Unit.

BackgroundWe studied the safety of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PCDT) in severe acute respiratory syndrome novel coronavirus 2 (SARS-nCoV2).Patients and MethodsFrom 01 March 20 to 30 November 2020, 1635 required hospital admission of which 145 (9%) required intensive (ICU) care. The primary outcomes are mortality and secondary outcomes were duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), length of stay (LOS) in ICU and hospital, and days required for decannulation.ResultsOut of the 145 (9%), 107 (73.7%) were males (mean 61.4 years, median body mass index (BMI) of 28.2 kg/m2), and 38 (26.2%) were females (mean 58.10 years, median BMI of 31.2 kg/m2). In the cohort of 80 (55.17%) requiring IMV, 19 (23.7%) died within 72 hours and were not included in the study, 37 (group “NT”) and 24 (group “T”) had a median duration of ventilation of 9 d (IQR, 6-11) and 12 d (IQR, 11-17.25) respectively. Patients in group “T” underwent PCDT based on clinical criteria (fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) of ≤ 50% with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of ≤ 10 cms of H2O with stable hemodynamics), and 16 (66.7%) had survived. The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) does not need to be negative, and none of the health care workers (HCW’s) were infected. The Cox-hazard ratio [HR] is 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] (0.09, 0.41) with a P-value of <0.001, 83 (57.2%) were discharged with a mortality of 42.8%.ConclusionsPCDT is safe and effective in patients anticipated in need of prolonged mechanical ventilation.

Association of Tracheostomy With Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Among Health Care Professionals

Approximately 5% to 15% of patients with COVID-19 require invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and, at times, tracheostomy. Details regarding the safety and use of tracheostomy in treating COVID-19 continue to evolve. To evaluate the association of tracheostomy with COVID-19 patient outcomes and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among health care professionals (HCPs). EMBASE (Ovid), Medline (Ovid), and Web of Science from January 1, 2020, to March 4, 2021. English-language studies investigating patients with COVID-19 who were receiving IMV and undergoing tracheostomy. Observational and randomized clinical trials were eligible (no randomized clinical trials were found in the search). All screening was performed by 2 reviewers (P.S. and M.L.). Overall, 156 studies underwent full-text review. We performed data extraction in accordance with Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We used a random-effects model, and ROBINS-I was used for the risk-of-bias analysis. SARS-CoV-2 transmission between HCPs and levels of personal protective equipment, in addition to complications, time to decannulation, ventilation weaning, and intensive care unit (ICU) discharge in patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy. Of the 156 studies that underwent full-text review, only 69 were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 14 of these 69 studies (20.3%) were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 4669 patients were included in the 69 studies, and the mean (range) patient age across studies was 60.7 (49.1-68.8) years (43 studies [62.3%] with 1856 patients). We found that in all studies, 1854 patients (73.8%) were men and 658 (26.2%) were women. We found that 28 studies (40.6%) investigated either surgical tracheostomy or percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Overall, 3 of 58 studies (5.17%) identified a small subset of HCPs who developed COVID-19 that was associated with tracheostomy. Studies did not consistently report the number of HCPs involved in tracheostomy. Among the patients, early tracheostomy was associated with faster ICU discharge (mean difference, 6.17 days; 95% CI, -11.30 to -1.30), but no change in IMV weaning (mean difference, -2.99 days; 95% CI, -8.32 to 2.33) or decannulation (mean difference, -3.12 days; 95% CI, -7.35 to 1.12). There was no association between mortality or perioperative complications and type of tracheostomy. A risk-of-bias evaluation that used ROBINS-I demonstrated notable bias in the confounder and patient selection domains because of a lack of randomization and cohort matching. There was notable heterogeneity in study reporting. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that enhanced personal protective equipment is associated with low rates of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during tracheostomy. Early tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 may reduce ICU stay, but this finding is limited by the observational nature of the included studies.

Safety of Percutaneous vs Open Tracheostomy on Intubated Patients in ICU Setting: Which One is Better?

To study the safety of percutaneous vs open tracheostomy approaches on patients requiring long term ventilation in ICU setting. It is a prospective study done over a period of 2years on 105 patients requiring long term ventilation in ICU set up in a tertiary care hospital. Patients were subjected to either open approach or percutaneous tracheostomy bedside in ICU itself. Then patients were followed during their hospital stay to look for any tracheostomy related complications. Data regarding age, gender, indications of long term ventilation and complications were compiled and analysis was done. It was found that most of the patients were of male gender (88.6%) in the age group of 50-59years of age. The most common cause for tracheostomy was head injury secondary to road traffic accident, seen in 79 out of 105 cases. On comparing complications rate, there was no statistically significant difference in both the groups. However rate of peristomal infection is more with open approach group (P < 0.05). Percutaneous tracheostomy can be performed safely in ICU as a bedside procedure. There is significant reduction in peristomal infection with percutaneous tracheostomy and there is no significant difference in other complications between the two groups. Thus percutaneous tracheostomy is as safe as an open approach tracheostomy in properly selected cases.

Improving the Safety and Science of COVID‐19 Tracheostomy: Challenges and Opportunities

The LaryngoscopeVolume 131, Issue 7 p. E2160-E2161 Comprehensive Otolaryngology Improving the Safety and Science of COVID-19 Tracheostomy: Challenges and Opportunities Michael J. Brenner MD, FACS, Corresponding Author Michael J. Brenner MD, FACS mbren@med.umich.edu orcid.org/0000-0003-4926-0957 Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. Global Tracheostomy Collaborative, Raleigh, North Carolina, U.S.A. Send correspondence to Michael J. Brenner, MD, FACS, Associate Professor of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, 1903 Taubman Center SPC 5312, Ann Arbor, MI 48104. E-mail: mbren@med.umich.eduSearch for more papers by this authorChristopher H. Rassekh MD, FACS, Christopher H. Rassekh MD, FACS Department of Otorhinolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorPavel Dulguerov MD, PhD, Pavel Dulguerov MD, PhD Division of Head and Neck Surgery, Hôpital de la Tour, Meyrin, Geneva University, Geneva, SwitzerlandSearch for more papers by this author Michael J. Brenner MD, FACS, Corresponding Author Michael J. Brenner MD, FACS mbren@med.umich.edu orcid.org/0000-0003-4926-0957 Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. Global Tracheostomy Collaborative, Raleigh, North Carolina, U.S.A. Send correspondence to Michael J. Brenner, MD, FACS, Associate Professor of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Michigan Medical School, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, 1903 Taubman Center SPC 5312, Ann Arbor, MI 48104. E-mail: mbren@med.umich.eduSearch for more papers by this authorChristopher H. Rassekh MD, FACS, Christopher H. Rassekh MD, FACS Department of Otorhinolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorPavel Dulguerov MD, PhD, Pavel Dulguerov MD, PhD Division of Head and Neck Surgery, Hôpital de la Tour, Meyrin, Geneva University, Geneva, SwitzerlandSearch for more papers by this author First published: 16 March 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.29512 The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume131, Issue7July 2021Pages E2160-E2161 RelatedInformation

Surgical tracheostomy in acohort of COVID-19patients.

BackgroundOne of the main symptoms of severe infection with the new coronavirus‑2 (SARS-CoV-2) is hypoxemic respiratory failure because of viral pneumonia with the need for mechanical ventilation. Prolonged mechanical ventilation may require a tracheostomy, but the increased risk for contamination is a matter of considerable debate.ObjectiveEvaluation of safety and effects of surgical tracheostomy on ventilation parameters and outcome in patients with COVID-19.Study designRetrospective observational study between March 27 and May 18, 2020, in a single-center coronavirus disease-designated ICU at a tertiary care German hospital.PatientsPatients with COVID-19 were treated with open surgical tracheostomy due to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation.MeasurementsClinical and ventilation data were obtained from medical records in a retrospective manner.ResultsA total of 18 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV‑2 infection and surgical tracheostomy were analyzed. The age range was 42–87 years. All patients received open tracheostomy between 2–16 days after admission. Ventilation after tracheostomy was less invasive (reduction in PEAK and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]) and lung compliance increased over time after tracheostomy. Also, sedative drugs could be reduced, and patients had a reduced need of norepinephrine to maintain hemodynamic stability. Six of 18 patients died. All surgical staff were equipped with N99-masks and facial shields or with powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR).ConclusionOur data suggest that open surgical tracheostomy can be performed without severe complications in patients with COVID-19. Tracheostomy may reduce invasiveness of mechanical ventilation and the need for sedative drugs and norepinehprine. Recommendations for personal protective equipment (PPE) for surgical staff should be followed when PPE is available to avoid contamination of the personnel.