Complication Rate of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Adults With Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Obesity has traditionally been described as a relative contraindication to percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT). Increased familiarity with the technique and use of bronchoscopy or real-time ultrasonography to enhance visualization have led many practitioners to expand the indication for PDT to patients historically deemed to have high risk of perioperative complications. Objective: To assess the reported complication rate of PDT in critically ill adults with obesity and compare it with that of open surgical tracheostomies (OSTs) in this patient population and with that of PDT in their counterparts without obesity. Data Sources: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 2000, to March 1, 2022. Key terms related to percutaneous tracheostomy and obesity were included. Study Selection: Original investigations of critically ill adult patients (age ≥18 years) with obesity who underwent PDT that reported at least 1 complication of interest were included. Case reports or series with fewer than 5 patients were excluded, as were studies in a language other than English or French. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) were used, with independent extraction by multiple observers. Frequencies were reported for all dichotomous variables. Relative risks for complications were calculated using both fixed-effects and random-effects models in the meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes included mortality directly associated with the procedure, conversion to OST, and complications associated with the procedure (subclassified into life-threatening or non-life-threatening adverse events). Results: Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review, comprising 1355 patients with obesity who underwent PDT. The PDT-related complication rate was 16.6% among patients with obesity overall (791 patients, 17 studies), most of which were non-life-threatening. Only 0.6% of cases (8 of 1314 patients, 17 studies) were aborted or converted to an OST. A meta-analysis of 12 studies (N = 4212; 1078 with obesity and 3134 without obesity) showed that patients with obesity had a higher rate of complications associated with PDT compared with their counterparts without obesity (risk ratio, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.38-2.28). A single study compared PDT with OST directly for critically ill adults with obesity; thus, the intended meta-analysis could not be performed in this subgroup. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that the rate of complications of PDT is low in critically ill individuals with obesity, although the risk of complications may be higher than in individuals without obesity.

Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: 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. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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.

Tracheostomy-related indications, early complications and their predictors among patients in low resource settings: a prospective cohort study in the pre-COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy is a life-saving procedure whose outcomes may vary between hospitals based on disparities in their existing expertise. We aimed at establishing the indications, early tracheostomy-related complications and their associated factors in Uganda. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, we consecutively enrolled one-hundred patients, both adults and children 2 h post-tracheostomy procedure. At baseline, information on patients' socio-demographics, tracheostomy indications, pre- and post-procedural characteristics was collected through researcher administered questionnaires and from medical records. Clinical examination was performed at baseline but also at either day 7 or whenever a tracheostomy-related complication was suspected during the 7 days follow-up. Comparison of patients' baseline characteristics, tracheostomy indications and complications across two hospitals was done using Pearson's chi-square. For predictors of early tracheostomy complications, bivariate and multivariate analysis models were fitted using binomial regression in STATA 13.0 software. RESULTS: All patients underwent surgical tracheostomy. Majority were adults (84%) and males (70%). The commonest tracheostomy indications were; pulmonary toilet (58%) and anticipated prolonged intubation (42%). Overall, 53% (95% CI: 43.0 - 62.7) had early complications with the commonest being tube obstruction (52.6%). Independent predictors of early tracheostomy-related complications were; anticipated prolonged intubation as an indication (RR = 1.8, 95%CI: 1.19 - 2.76), Bjork flap tracheal incision (RR = 1.6, 95%CI: 1.09 - 2.43), vertical tracheal incision (RR = 1.53, 95%CI: 1.02 - 2.27), and age below 18 years (RR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.00 - 1.47). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary toilet is the commonest tracheostomy indication at major hospitals in Uganda. The incidence of early tracheostomy complications is high and majorly related to post-procedure tracheostomy tube management. Having anticipated prolonged intubation as an indication for tracheostomy, a Bjork flap or vertical tracheal incisions and being a child were associated with increased risk of complications. Emphasis on multidisciplinary team care, standardization of tracheostomy care protocols, and continuous collection of patient data as well as paying attention to patient quality of life factors such as early return to oral feeding, ambulation and normal speech may have great potential for improved quality of tracheostomy care in low resource settings.

Outcome of tracheostomy among COVID-19 patients in a tertiary hospital setting: Our experience.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented. Amongst those who contracted COVID-19, a number required intubation and prolonged ventilation. This increased the number of ventilated patients in the hospital and increased the requirement for tracheostomy of severe COVID-19 patients. Our objective is to study the outcome of patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a novel retrospective study in a tertiary centre in Malaysia. Case notes of COVID- 19 patients who underwent tracheostomy in Hospital Ampang were collected using the electronic Hospital Information System. Data were analysed using the SPSS system. RESULTS: From a total of 30 patients, 15 patients survived. All patients underwent either open or percutaneous tracheostomy. The median age is 53 (range: 28-69) with a significant p-value of 0.02. Amongst comorbidities, it was noted that diabetes mellitus was significant with a p-value of 0.014. The median time from the onset of COVID-19 to tracheostomy is 30 days. The median duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay is 30.5 days, with the median duration of hospital length of stay of 44 days (p = 0.009 and <0.001, respectively). No complications that contributed to patient death were found. Survivors had a median of 29.5 days from tracheostomy to oxygen liberation. CONCLUSION: Tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients that requires prolonged ventilation is unavoidable. It is a safe procedure and mortality is not related to the procedure. Mortality is primarily associated with COVID-19.

Measurement of airborne particle emission during surgical and percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy COVID-19 adapted procedures in a swine model: Experimental report and review of literature.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical tracheostomy (ST) and Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT) are classified as high-risk aerosol-generating procedures and might lead to healthcare workers (HCW) infection. Albeit the COVID-19 strain slightly released since the vaccination era, preventing HCW from infection remains a major economical and medical concern. To date, there is no study monitoring particle emissions during ST and PDT in a clinical setting. The aim of this study was to monitor particle emissions during ST and PDT in a swine model. METHODS: A randomized animal study on swine model with induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was conducted. A dedicated room with controlled airflow was used to standardize the measurements obtained using an airborne optical particle counter. 6 ST and 6 PDT were performed in 12 pigs. Airborne particles (diameter of 0.5 to 3 µm) were continuously measured; video and audio data were recorded. The emission of particles was considered as significant if the number of particles increased beyond the normal variations of baseline particle contamination determinations in the room. These significant emissions were interpreted in the light of video and audio recordings. Duration of procedures, number of expiratory pauses, technical errors and adverse events were also analyzed. RESULTS: 10 procedures (5 ST and 5 PDT) were fully analyzable. There was no systematic aerosolization during procedures. However, in 1/5 ST and 4/5 PDT, minor leaks and some adverse events (cuff perforation in 1 ST and 1 PDT) occurred. Human factors were responsible for 1 aerosolization during 1 PDT procedure. ST duration was significantly shorter than PDT (8.6 ± 1.3 vs 15.6 ± 1.9 minutes) and required less expiratory pauses (1 vs 6.8 ± 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 adaptations allow preventing for major aerosol leaks for both ST and PDT, contributing to preserving healthcare workers during COVID-19 outbreak, but failed to achieve a perfectly airtight procedure. However, with COVID-19 adaptations, PDT required more expiratory pauses and more time than ST. Human factors and adverse events may lead to aerosolization and might be more frequent in PDT.

Early versus Late Tracheostomy Promotes Weaning in Intensive Care Unit Patients: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The time interval between the patients' intubation and the performance of a tracheostomy has been considered as critical for the disease prognosis and outcome. The aim of the present study was to compare and contrast the outcomes of early vs late tracheostomy with regard to ICU patients' weaning from respiratory support. METHODS: This retrospective observational study, involved patients who were hospitalized in two general and one Covid-19 ICUs of two tertiary hospitals in Athens and were subjected to tracheostomy. Data were collected from the patients' medical records in order to estimate the duration of patient weaning and the number of days from the patients' intubation until the time of tracheostomy. In the present study the term earlytracheostomy denotes tracheostomy performed within 14 days from patient intubation and late tracheostomydefines the tracheostomy carried out after 14 days. For Covid-19 patients, guidelines suggested that tracheostomies should be performed 21 days following intubation, due to the high risk of virus transmission. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-one patients who underwent tracheostomy participated in the study. Most tracheostomies were performed using the percutaneous technique. The group of patients tracheostomized within 14 days after their admission in ICU weaned faster from respiratory support compared to ones who were tracheostomized after 14 days. CONCLUSIONS: The most common distinction between early and late tracheostomy is 14 days, with early tracheostomy being more beneficial in terms of patients' outcomes, and specifically ICU patients' weaning.

Resuming Swallowing and Oral Feeding in Tracheostomized COVID-19 Patients: Experience of a Swiss COVID-Center and Narrative Literature Review.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, percutaneous tracheostomy proved to be an effective option in the management of patients with prolonged periods of intubation. In fact, among other things, it allowed early discharge from ICUs and contributed to reducing overcrowding in intensive care settings, a central and critical point in the COVID pandemic. As a direct consequence, the management and the weaning of frail, tracheostomized and ventilated patients was diverted to sub-intensive or normal hospitalization wards. One central challenge in this setting is the resumption of swallowing and oral feeding, which require interdisciplinary management involving a phoniatrician, ENT, pneumologist, and speech therapist. With this article, we aim to share the experience of a Swiss COVID-19 Center and to draw up a narrative review on the issues concerning the management of the tracheostomy cannula during swallowing resumption, integrating the most recent evidence from the literature with the clinical experiences of the professionals directly involved in the management of tracheostomized COVID-19 patients. In view of the heterogeneity of COVID-19 patients, we believe that the procedures described in the article are applicable to a larger population of patients undergoing tracheostomy weaning.

Tracheostomy Practices and Outcomes in Children During Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

OBJECTIVES: Children receiving prolonged extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support may benefit from tracheostomy during ECMO by facilitating rehabilitation; however, the procedure carries risks, especially hemorrhagic complications. Knowledge of tracheostomy practices and outcomes of ECMO-supported children who undergo tracheostomy on ECMO may inform decision-making. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: ECMO centers contributing to the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry. PATIENTS: Children from birth to 18 years who received ECMO support for greater than or equal to 7 days for respiratory failure from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Three thousand six hundred eighty-five children received at least 7 days of ECMO support for respiratory failure. The median duration of ECMO support was 13.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 9.3-19.9 d), and inhospital mortality was 38.7% (1,426/3,685). A tracheostomy was placed during ECMO support in 94/3,685 (2.6%). Of those who received a tracheostomy on ECMO, the procedure was performed at a median 13.2 days (IQR, 6.3-25.9 d) after initiation of ECMO. Surgical site bleeding was documented in 26% of children who received a tracheostomy (12% after tracheostomy placement). Among children who received a tracheostomy, the median duration of ECMO support was 24.2 days (IQR, 13.0-58.7 d); inhospital mortality was 30/94 (32%). Those that received a tracheostomy before 14 days on ECMO were older (median age, 15.8 yr [IQR, 4.7-15.5] vs 11.7 yr [IQR, 11.5-17.3 yr]; p =0.002) and more likely to have been supported on venovenous-ECMO (84% vs 52%; p = 0.001). Twenty-two percent (11/50) of those who received a tracheostomy before 14 days died in the hospital, compared with 19/44 (43%) of those who received a tracheostomy at 14 days or later (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomies during ECMO were uncommon in children. One in four patients who received a tracheostomy on ECMO had surgical site bleeding. Children who had tracheostomies placed after 14 days were younger and had worse outcomes, potentially representing tracheostomy as a "secondary" strategy for prolonged ECMO support.

Association of mortality and early tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective analysis.

COVID-19 adds to the complexity of optimal timing for tracheostomy. Over the course of this pandemic, and expanded knowledge of the disease, many centers have changed their operating procedures and performed an early tracheostomy. We studied the data on early and delayed tracheostomy regarding patient outcome such as mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all tracheostomies at our institution in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 2020 to June 2021. Time from intubation to tracheostomy and mortality of early (≤ 10 days) vs. late (> 10 days) tracheostomy were the primary objectives of this study. We used mixed cox-regression models to calculate the effect of distinct variables on events. We studied 117 tracheostomies. Intubation to tracheostomy shortened significantly (Spearman's correlation coefficient; rho = - 0.44, p ≤ 0.001) during the course of this pandemic. Early tracheostomy was associated with a significant increase in mortality in uni- and multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio 1.83, 95% CI 1.07-3.17, p = 0.029). The timing of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients has a potentially critical impact on mortality. The timing of tracheostomy has changed during this pandemic tending to be performed earlier. Future prospective research is necessary to substantiate these results.

Tracheostomy outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, which analysed the effect of tracheostomy timing and technique (surgical vs percutaneous) on mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), decannulation from tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, and complications. METHODS: Four databases were screened between January 1, 2020 and January 10, 2022 (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane). Papers were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Population or Problem, Intervention or exposure, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) guidelines. Meta-analysis and meta-regression for main outcomes were performed. RESULTS: The search yielded 9024 potentially relevant studies, of which 47 (n=5268 patients) were included. High levels of between-study heterogeneity were observed across study outcomes. The pooled mean tracheostomy timing was 16.5 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.7-18.4; I2=99.6%). Pooled mortality was 22.1% (95% CI: 18.7-25.5; I2=89.0%). Meta-regression did not show significant associations between mortality and tracheostomy timing, mechanical ventilation duration, time to decannulation, and tracheostomy technique. Pooled mean estimates for ICU and hospital LOS were 29.6 (95% CI: 24.0-35.2; I2=98.6%) and 38.8 (95% CI: 32.1-45.6; I2=95.7%) days, both associated with mechanical ventilation duration (coefficient 0.8 [95% CI: 0.2-1.4], P=0.02 and 0.9 [95% CI: 0.4-1.4], P=0.01, respectively) but not tracheostomy timing. Data were insufficient to assess tracheostomy technique on LOS. Duration of mechanical ventilation was 23.4 days (95% CI: 19.2-27.7; I2=99.3%), not associated with tracheostomy timing. Data were insufficient to assess the effect of tracheostomy technique on mechanical ventilation duration. Time to decannulation was 23.8 days (95% CI: 19.7-27.8; I2=98.7%), not influenced by tracheostomy timing or technique. The most common complications were stoma infection, ulcers or necrosis, and bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 requiring tracheostomy, the timing and technique of tracheostomy did not clearly impact on patient outcomes. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42021272220.

Interventional Pulmonology and the Esophagus: Tracheostomy and Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Placement.

Tracheostomy is a procedure commonly performed in intensive care units (ICU) for patients who are unable to be weaned from mechanical ventilation. Both percutaneous and surgical techniques have been validated and are chosen based on the local expertise available. A primary advantage to the percutaneous technique is the ability to perform this procedure in the ICU without transporting the patient to a procedure suite or operating room; this has become particularly important with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. An additional advantage is the ability to perform both the tracheostomy and the gastrostomy tube placement, if needed, during the same anesthetic episode. This decreases the need for additional sedation, interruption of anticoagulation, repeat transfusion, and coordination of care between multiple services. In the context of COVID-19, combined tracheostomy and gastrostomy placement exposes less health care providers overall and minimizes transportation needs.

Tracheostomy Practices and Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 Supported by Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An Analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with COVID-19 has been supported by major healthcare organizations, yet the role of specific management strategies during ECMO requires further study. We sought to characterize tracheostomy practices, complications, and outcomes in ECMO-supported patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: ECMO centers contributing to the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. PATIENTS: Patients 16 years or older receiving venovenous ECMO for respiratory support for: 1) COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 (through October 2021) and 2) pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia in 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 7,047 patients who received ECMO support for acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19. A total of 32% of patients were recorded as having a tracheostomy procedure during ECMO, and 51% had a tracheostomy at some point during hospitalization. The frequency of tracheostomy was similar in pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, but tracheostomies were performed 3 days earlier compared with patients with COVID-19 (median 6.7 d [interquartile range [IQR], 3.0-12.0 d] vs 10.0 d [IQR, 5.0-16.5 d]; p < 0.001). More patients were mobilized with pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, but receipt of a tracheostomy during ECMO was associated with increased mobilization in both cohorts. More bleeding complications occurred in patients who received a tracheostomy, with 9% of patients with COVID-19 who received a tracheostomy reported as having surgical site bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomies are performed in COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO at rates similar to practices in pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, although later during the course of ECMO. Receipt of a tracheostomy was associated with increased patient mobilization. Overall mortality was similar between those who did and did not receive a tracheostomy.

Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy with single use bronchoscopes versus reusable bronchoscopes - a prospective randomized trial (TraSUB).

BACKGROUND: Apart from conventional reusable bronchoscopes, single-use bronchoscopes (SUB) were recently introduced. Data suggest that SUB might prevent from the risk of cross contamination (i.e. multiresistant pathogens, SARS CoV-2) and save costs. We aimed to investigate visualization, ventilation, handling characteristics, changes in patients' gas exchange, and costs associated with both types of bronchoscopes during percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority study, 46 patients undergoing PDT were randomized 1:1 to PDT with SUB (Ambu aScope) or reusable bronchoscopes (CONV, Olympus BF-P60). Visualization of tracheal structures rated on 4-point Likert scales was the primary end-point. Furthermore, quality of ventilation, device handling characteristics, changes in the patients' gas exchange, pH values, and costs were assessed. RESULTS: Noninferiority for visualization (the primary endpoint) was demonstrated for the SUB group. Mean visualization scores (lower values better) were 4.1 (95% confidence intervals: 3.9;4.3) for SUB vs. 4.1 (4.0;4.2) for CONV. Noninferiority of ventilation (estimated by minute volume and SpO2) during the procedure could be shown as well. Mean score was 2.6 (2.0;3.1) for SUB vs. 2.4 (2.1;2.7) for CONV (lower values better). No significant differences regarding handling (SUB: 1.2 (1.0;1.4), CONV: 1.3 (1.1;1.6)), blood gas analyses and respiratory variables were found. Cost analysis in our institution revealed 93 € per conventional bronchoscopy versus 232.50 € with SUB, not considering an estimate for possible infection due to cross-contamination with the reusable device. CONCLUSION: In our study, visualization and overall performance of the SUB during PDT were noninferior to reusable bronchoscopes. Therefore, PDT with SUB is feasible and should be considered if favored by individual institution's cost analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03952247 . Submitted for registration on 28/04/2019 and first posted on 16/05/2019.

Need for tracheostomy in major head and neck ablative surgery: a paradigm shift during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Management of the airway in the perioperative period for patients requiring major head and neck ablative surgery has commonly included the performance of elective surgical tracheostomy. This has been standard practice in most maxillofacial units across the UK, including ours. However, the COVID-19 pandemic and emerging guidelines on aerosol-generating procedures required us to revisit the need for a perioperative tracheostomy. METHODS: We present our series of 29 consecutive cases, cared for during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, that were managed either using surgical tracheostomy or overnight tracheal intubation. RESULTS: Out of 29 patients 3 received a surgical tracheostomy. The average duration of tracheostomy use was 8 days. Twenty patients were managed using a period of overnight tracheal intubation. Average duration of tracheal intubation was 1.2 days, with an average intensive care unit stay of 1.7 days. The average duration of hospital stay was 15.8 days for patients managed with overnight tracheal intubation and 30.1 days for patients who received a surgical tracheostomy. The return to theatre rate was 13.8% for reasons including flap failure and neck space infection. There were no airway issues reported in this series of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that overnight tracheal intubation can be a safe alternative to surgical tracheostomy in the majority of cases.

Safe ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy in eight steps and necessary precautions in COVID-19 patients.

Percutaneous tracheostomy has been considered the standard method today, the bronchoscopy-guided technique being the most frequently performed. A safe alternative is ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy, which can be carried out by the surgeon, avoiding the logistical difficulties of having a specialist in bronchoscopy. Studies prove that the efficacy and safety of the ultrasound-guided technique are similar when compared to the bronchoscopy-guided one. Thus, it is of paramount importance that surgeons have ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy as a viable and beneficial alternative to the open procedure. In this article, we describe eight main steps in performing ultrasound-guided percutaneous tracheostomy, highlighting essential technical points that can reduce the risk of complications from the procedure. Furthermore, we detail some precautions that one must observe to reduce the risk of aerosolization and contamination of the team when percutaneous tracheostomy is indicated in patients with COVID-19.

Aerosol-generating procedure; percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare percutaneous tracheostomy (PCT) and surgical tracheostomy's aerosol and droplet scattering by using a particle counter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was carried out with 35 patients between October 2020 and June 2021. All personal protective equipment was provided to protect healthcare workers. Measurements were made in the 5 s period before the tracheal incision and the 5 s period after the tracheal incision. RESULTS: The mean age of the 15 female and 20 male patients in this study was 68.88 ± 13.48 years old (range: 33-95 years old). Patients were intubated for an average of 22 days. Particle amounts were found to be significantly higher at 5 µm (p = 0.003) and 10 µm (p = 0.012) during PCT. In surgical tracheostomy, there was no significant increase in the number of particles. When the particle measurement values of both methods were compared with each other, there was a significantly more particle scattering in PCT than in surgical tracheotomy at 0.3 µm (p = 0.034), 5 µm (p = 0.001), and 10 µm (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: According to the data in our study, a surgical tracheotomy was not identified as an aerosol-generating procedure. Considering the risk of airborne transmission may increase due to viral mutations, we have shown that surgical tracheostomy may be more appropriate in patients who need a tracheostomy. Of course, the use of personal protective equipment during these processes is very important.

Early tracheostomy: on the cutting edge, some benefit more than others.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The decision to undergo early tracheostomy in critically ill patients has been the subject of multiple studies in recent years, including several meta-analyses and a large-scale examination of the National in-patient Sampling (NIS) database. The research has focused on different patient populations, and identified common outcomes measures related to ventilation. At the crux of the new research is the decision to undergo an additional invasive procedure, mainly tracheostomy, rather than attempt endotracheal tube ventilation with or without early extubation. Notably, recent research indicates that neurological and SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) patients seem to have an exaggerated benefit from early tracheostomy. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies of patients undergoing early tracheostomy have shown decreases in ventilator associated pneumonia, ventilator duration and duration of ICU stay. However, these studies have shown mixed data with respect to mortality and length of hospitalization. Such advantages only become apparent with large-scale examination. Confounding the overall discussion is that the research has focused on heterogeneous groups, including neurosurgical ICU patients, general ICU patients, and most recently, intubated COVID-19 patients. SUMMARY: Specific populations such as neurosurgical and COVID-19 patients have clearly defined benefits following early tracheostomy. Although the benefit is less pronounced, there does seem to be an advantage in general ICU patients with regards to ventilator-free days and lower incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. In these patients, large-scale examination points to a clear mortality benefit.

Utilisation of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 in England: Patient characteristics, timing and outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to characterise the use of tracheostomy procedures for all COVID-19 critical care patients in England and to understand how patient factors and timing of tracheostomy affected outcomes. DESIGN: A retrospective observational study using exploratory analysis of hospital administrative data. SETTING: All 500 National Health Service hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: All hospitalised COVID-19 patients aged ≥18 years in England between 1 March and 31 October 2020 were included. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: This was a retrospective exploratory analysis using the Hospital Episode Statistics administrative data set. Multilevel modelling was used to explore the relationship between demographic factors, comorbidity and use of tracheostomy and the association between tracheostomy use, tracheostomy timing and the outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 2200 hospitalised COVID-19 patients had a tracheostomy. Tracheostomy utilisation varied across the study period, peaking in April-June 2020. In multivariable modelling, for those admitted to critical care, tracheostomy was most common in those aged 40-79 years, in males and in people of Black and Asian ethnic groups and those with a history of cerebrovascular disease. In critical care patients, tracheostomy was associated with lower odds of mortality (OR: 0.514 [95% CI 0.443 to 0.596], but greater length of stay OR: 41.143 [95% CI 30.979 to 54.642]). In patients that survived, earlier timing of tracheostomy (≤14 days post admission to critical care) was significantly associated with shorter length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomy is safe and advantageous for critical care COVID-19 patients. Early tracheostomy may be associated with better outcomes, such as shorter length of stay, compared to late tracheostomy.

Tracheostomy in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and follow-up: A parisian bicentric retrospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy has been proposed as an option to help organize the healthcare system to face the unprecedented number of patients hospitalized for a COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in intensive care units (ICU). It is, however, considered a particularly high-risk procedure for contamination. This paper aims to provide our experience in performing tracheostomies on COVID-19 critically ill patients during the pandemic and its long-term local complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients tracheostomized for a COVID-19-related ARDS in two university hospitals in the Paris region between January 27th (date of first COVID-19 admission) and May 18th, 2020 (date of last tracheostomy performed). We focused on tracheostomy technique (percutaneous versus surgical), timing (early versus late) and late complications. RESULTS: Forty-eight tracheostomies were performed with an equal division between surgical and percutaneous techniques. There was no difference in patients' characteristics between surgical and percutaneous groups. Tracheostomy was performed after a median of 17 [12-22] days of mechanical ventilation (MV), with 10 patients in the "early" group (≤ day 10) and 38 patients in the "late" group (> day 10). Survivors required MV for a median of 32 [22-41] days and were ultimately decannulated with a median of 21 [15-34] days spent on cannula. Patients in the early group had shorter ICU and hospital stays (respectively 15 [12-19] versus 35 [25-47] days; p = 0.002, and 21 [16-28] versus 54 [35-72] days; p = 0.002) and spent less time on MV (respectively 17 [14-20] and 35 [27-43] days; p<0.001). Interestingly, patients in the percutaneous group had shorter hospital and rehabilitation center stays (respectively 44 [34-81] versus 92 [61-118] days; p = 0.012, and 24 [11-38] versus 45 [22-71] days; p = 0.045). Of the 30 (67%) patients examined by a head and neck surgeon, 17 (57%) had complications with unilateral laryngeal palsy (n = 5) being the most prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomy seems to be a safe procedure that could help ICU organization by delegating work to a separate team and favoring patient turnover by allowing faster transfer to step-down units. Following guidelines alone was found sufficient to prevent the risk of aerosolization and contamination of healthcare professionals.