Tracheotomy in ventilator-dependent patients with COVID-19: a cross-sectional study of analgesia and sedative requirements.

OBJECTIVE: During March 2020 in the United States, demand for sedatives increased by 91%, that for analgesics rose by 79%, and demand for neuromuscular blockers increased by 105%, all owing to the number of COVID-19 cases requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (MV). We hypothesize that analgesic and sedative requirements decrease following tracheotomy in this patient population. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we conducted a retrospective chart review to identify patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheotomy (T) at an academic medical center between March 2020 and January 2021. We used a paired Student t-test to compare total oral morphine equivalents (OMEs), total lorazepam equivalents, 24-hour average dexmedetomidine dosage in µg/kg/hour, and 24-hour average propofol dosage in µg/kg/minute on days T-1 and T+2 for each patient. RESULTS: Of 50 patients, 46 required opioids before and after tracheotomy (mean decrease of 49.4 mg OMEs). Eight patients required benzodiazepine infusion (mean decrease of 45.1 mg lorazepam equivalents. Fifteen patients required dexmedetomidine infusion (mean decrease 0.34 µg/kg/hour). Seventeen patients required propofol (mean decrease 20.5 µg/kg/minute). CONCLUSIONS: When appropriate personal protective equipment is available, use of tracheotomy in patients with COVID-19 who require MV may help to conserve medication supplies in times of extreme shortages.

TTCOV19: timing of tracheotomy in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients: a multicentre, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill COVID-19 patients may develop acute respiratory distress syndrome and the need for respiratory support, including mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. Previous observational studies have suggested early tracheotomy to be advantageous. The aim of this parallel, multicentre, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the optimal timing of tracheotomy. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2-infected patients within the Region Västra Götaland of Sweden who needed intubation and mechanical respiratory support were included and randomly assigned to early tracheotomy (≤ 7 days after intubation) or late tracheotomy (≥ 10 days after intubation). The primary objective was to compare the total number of mechanical ventilation days between the groups. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients (mean age 65 years, 79% males) were included. Seventy-two patients were assigned to early tracheotomy, and 78 were assigned to late tracheotomy. One hundred two patients (68%) underwent tracheotomy of whom sixty-one underwent tracheotomy according to the protocol. The overall median number of days in mechanical ventilation was 18 (IQR 9; 28), but no significant difference was found between the two treatment regimens in the intention-to-treat analysis (between-group difference: - 1.5 days (95% CI - 5.7 to 2.8); p = 0.5). A significantly reduced number of mechanical ventilation days was found in the early tracheotomy group during the per-protocol analysis (between-group difference: - 8.0 days (95% CI - 13.8 to - 2.27); p = 0.0064). The overall correlation between the timing of tracheotomy and days of mechanical ventilation was significant (Spearman's correlation: 0.39, p < 0.0001). The total death rate during intensive care was 32.7%, but no significant differences were found between the groups regarding survival, complications or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The potential superiority of early tracheotomy when compared to late tracheotomy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not confirmed by the present randomized controlled trial but is a strategy that should be considered in selected cases where the need for MV for more than 14 days cannot be ruled out. Trial registration NCT04412356 , registered 05/24/2020.

ICU tracheotomies in patients with COVID-19: a lesson learned for future viral pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has resulted in a large number of patients requiring intubation and prolonged mechanical ventilation. The current knowledge on the tracheotomies regarding the time form intubation, method and ventilatory parameters optimal for their performance in the mechanically ventilated patients with COVID ARDS are scarce; thus, the aim of this study is to present new data regarding their safety, adverse events and timing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study is based on the data of 66 critically ill COVID patients including demographic data, timing and technique of tracheotomy, ventilatory parameters in the time of procedure, as well as complication and survival rate. RESULTS: A number of 66 patients with COVID-related pneumonia were included in the study, among whom 32 were tracheotomized-25 patients underwent an early tracheotomy and 7 patients had late tracheotomy. The median duration of mechanical ventilation before the tracheotomy in the early group was 8 days (IQR 6-10) compared to 11 days (IQR 11-12.5.) p < 0.001) in late group. Risk of death in tracheotomy patients was significantly growing with growing level of PEEP and FiO2 at the moment of decision on tracheotomy, OR = 1.91 CI95 (1.23;3.57); p = 0.014 and OR = 1.18 CI95(1.03;1.43); p = 0.048, respectively. CONCLUSION: Early percutaneous tracheotomy is safe (both in terms of risk of viral transmission and complication rate) and feasible in COVID-19 patients. Stability of gas exchange, and ventilatory parameters are the main prognostic factors of the outcome.

Nine-month outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: A retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The outcome of performing a tracheostomy in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) seems promising based on the reported 30-day survival rate. However, long-term outcomes are still lacking. Therefore, our aim in this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of tracheostomy performed in critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 27 COVID-19 patients on whom tracheostomy was performed between February 28, 2020, and April 7, 2020, at Tongji Hospital (Wuhan, China). Patients' clinical characteristics, complications, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: All patients underwent successful bedside tracheostomy. Thirteen patients (48.1%) were successfully weaned off ventilation within 1 month. The survival rate at one, three, and nine months after tracheostomy were 63.0%, 37.0%, and 29.6%, respectively. At nine months after tracheostomy, 8/27 patients had survived, with five (62.5%) being discharged home while the remaining were dependent on nursing care. CONCLUSION: The survival rate of COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheotomy decreased markedly from 1 to 3 months after tracheotomy, remaining stable between 3 and 9 months. Medical support is much needed for COVID-19 patients over the first 90 days after tracheotomy.

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.

Successful Total Tracheal Replacement by Cryopreserved Aortic Allograft in a Patient Post-COVID-19 Infection.

This is the first report to our knowledge of a successful total tracheal replacement in a post-COVID-19 patient by cryopreserved aortic allograft. The graft was anastomosed to the cricoid and carina; a silicon stent was inserted to ensure patency. The patient was extubated on the operative table and was immediately able to breathe, speak, and swallow. No immunosuppression was administered. Three weeks after surgery, the patient was discharged from hospital in excellent health, and was able to resume his normal lifestyle, work, and activity as an amateur cyclist. Two months after surgery, the patient assumes aerosol with saline solution three times per day and no other therapy; routine bronchoscopy to clear secretions is no longer needed.

Revised recommendations from the CSO-HNS taskforce on performance of tracheotomy during the COVID-19 pandemic - what a difference a year makes.

BACKGROUND: During the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery (CSO-HNS) task force published recommendations on performance of tracheotomy. Since then, our understanding of the virus has evolved with ongoing intensive research efforts. New literature has helped us better understand various aspects including patient outcomes and health care worker (HCW) risks associated with tracheotomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, the task force has re-evaluated and revised some of the previous recommendations. MAIN BODY: Based on recent evidence, a negative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) COVID-19 swab status is no longer the main deciding factor in the timing of tracheotomy. Instead, tracheotomy may be considered as soon as COVID-19 swab positive patients are greater than 20 days beyond initial symptoms and 2 weeks of mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, both open and percutaneous surgical techniques may be considered with both techniques showing similar safety and outcome profiles. Additional recommendations with discussion of current evidence are presented. CONCLUSION: These revised recommendations apply new evidence in optimizing patient and health care system outcomes as well as minimizing risks of COVID-19 transmission during aerosol-generating tracheotomy procedures. As previously noted, additional evidence may lead to further evolution of these and other similar recommendations.

Timing of elective tracheotomy and duration of mechanical ventilation among patients admitted to intensive care with severe COVID-19: A multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Optimal timing for tracheotomy for critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is not established. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort including all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in 36 hospitals who required tracheotomy during first pandemic wave. With a target emulation trial framework, we studied the causal effects of early (7-10 days) versus late (>10 days) tracheotomy (LT) on time from tracheotomy to weaning, postoperative mortality, and tracheotomy complications. RESULTS: Of 696 patients, 20.4% received early tracheotomy (ET). ET was associated with faster weaning (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval, CI]: 1.25 [1.00-1.56]) without differences in mortality (HR [95% CI]: 0.85 [0.60-1.21]) or complications (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.56 [0.23-1.33]). CONCLUSIONS: ET had a similar or lower post-tracheotomy weaning time than LT, potentially shortening IMV and ICU stays, without changing complication or mortality rates in COVID-19 patients.

Tracheotomy in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 pandemic continues to produce a large number of patients with chronic respiratory failure and ventilator dependence. As such, surgeons will be called upon to perform tracheotomy for a subset of these chronically intubated patients. As seen during the SARS and the SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, aerosol-generating procedures (AGP) have been associated with higher rates of infection of medical personnel and potential acceleration of viral dissemination throughout the medical center. Therefore, a thoughtful approach to tracheotomy (and other AGPs) is imperative and maintaining traditional management norms may be unsuitable or even potentially harmful. We sought to review the existing evidence informing best practices and then develop straightforward guidelines for tracheotomy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This communication is the product of those efforts and is based on national and international experience with the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the SARS epidemic of 2002/2003.

Tracheostomy for COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: Multidisciplinary, Multicenter Data on Timing, Technique, and Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Tracheostomy has an essential role in managing COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. However, limited data are available on how tracheostomy affects COVID-19 outcomes, and uncertainty surrounding risk of infectious transmission has led to divergent recommendations and practices. METHODS: It is a multicenter, retrospective study; data were collected on all tracheostomies performed in COVID-19 patients at 7 hospitals in 5 tertiary academic medical systems from February 1, 2020 to September 4, 2020. RESULT: Tracheotomy was performed in 118 patients with median time from intubation to tracheostomy of 22 days (Q1-Q3: 18-25). All tracheostomies were performed employing measures to minimize aerosol generation, 78.0% by percutaneous technique, and 95.8% at bedside in negative pressure rooms. Seventy-eight (66.1%) patients were weaned from the ventilator and 18 (15.3%) patients died from causes unrelated to tracheostomy. No major procedural complications occurred. Early tracheostomy (≤14 days) was associated with decreased ventilator days; median ventilator days (Q1-Q3) among patients weaned from the ventilator in the early, middle and late groups were 21 (21-31), 34 (26.5-42), and 37 (32-41) days, respectively with P = 0.030. Compared to surgical tracheostomy, percutaneous technique was associated with faster weaning for patients weaned off the ventilator [median (Q1-Q3): 34 (29-39) vs 39 (34-51) days, P = 0.038]; decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia (58.7% vs 80.8%, P = 0.039); and among patients who were discharged, shorter intensive care unit duration [median (Q1-Q3): 33 (27-42) vs 47 (33-64) days, P = 0.009]; and shorter hospital length of stay [median (Q1-Q3): 46 (33-59) vs 59.5 (48-80) days, P = 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Early, percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.

Tracheotomies in COVID-19 Patients: Protocols and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Approximately 3-15% of COVID-19 patients will require prolonged mechanical ventilation thereby requiring consideration for tracheotomy. Guidelines for tracheotomy in this cohort of patients are therefore required with assessed outcomes of tracheotomies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheotomy. Inclusion criteria were the performance of a tracheotomy in COVID-19 positive patients between March 11 and December 31, 2020. Exclusion criteria were lack of consent, extubation prior to the performance of a tracheotomy, death prior to the performance of the tracheotomy, and COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheotomy who tested negative twice after medical treatment. The primary predictor variable was the performance of a tracheotomy in COVID-19 positive patients and the primary outcome variable was the time to cessation of mechanical ventilation with the institution of supplemental oxygen via trach mask. RESULTS: Seventeen tracheotomies were performed between 4-25 days following intubation (mean = 17 days). Seven patients died between 4 and 16 days (mean = 8.7 days) following tracheotomy and 10 living patients realized cessation of mechanical ventilation from 4 hours to 61 days following tracheotomy (mean = 19.3 days). These patients underwent tracheotomy between 4 and 22 days following intubation (mean = 14 days). The 7 patients who died following tracheotomy underwent the procedure between 7 and 25 days following intubation (mean = 18.2 days). Seven patients underwent tracheotomy on or after 20 days of intubation and 3 survived (43%). Ten patients underwent tracheotomy before 20 days of intubation and 7 patients survived (70%). Significant differences between the mortality groups were detected for age (P = .006), and for P/F ratio at time of consult (P = .047) and the time of tracheotomy (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Tracheotomies are safely performed in COVID-19 patients with a standardized protocol. The timing of tracheotomy in COVID-19 patients is based on ventilator parameters, P/F ratio, patient prognosis, patient advanced directives, and family wishes.

Otolaryngology activity in two hospitals in northern and central Italy differently affected by COVID-19 pandemic.

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic had a significant impact on the Italian healthcare system, although geographical differences were present; regions in northern Italy have been the most severely affected while regions in the south of the country were relatively spared. Otolaryngologists were actively involved in the management of the pandemic. In this work, we analyzed and compared the otolaryngology surgical activity performed during the pandemic in two large public hospitals located in different Italian regions. In northern Italy, otolaryngologists were mainly involved in performing surgical tracheotomies in COVID-19 positive patients and contributed to the management of these patients in intensive care units. In central Italy, where the burden of the infection was significantly lower, otolaryngologists focused on diagnosis and treatment of emergency and oncology patients. This analysis confirms the important role of the otolaryngology specialists during the pandemic, but also highlights specific differences between two large hospitals in different Italian regions.

[Droplet exposure during tracheotomy : Case analysis and consequences with respect to COVID-19 patients]. / Tröpfchenexposition bei Tracheotomie : Fallanalyse und Konsequenzen in Bezug auf COVID-19-Patienten.

BACKGROUND: The COVID(coronavirus disease)-19 pandemic is characterized by high infectivity, droplet transmission, and high viral load in the upper respiratory tract. Severe disease courses are associated with interstitial pneumonia and ventilated patients, in whom tracheotomy (TT)-a droplet- and aerosol-producing medical intervention-is regularly necessary. TT as a potential infection risk for medical staff is scarcely found in the literature. Therefore, the aim of this study was to quantify droplet exposure of the surgical team during TT, to better define the requirements for personal protective equipment (PPE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surgical TT was performed in four non-infectious patients, during which the surgeon and his assistant both wore a surgical nasal mask with a transparent visor. After the procedure, the type, distribution, and number of droplets on the visor were determined macroscopically and microscopically. RESULTS: An average of 29 droplets were found on the middle third of the visor, 4 on the right third, and 13 on the left third, with an average droplet size of 571 µm (±â€¯381 µm). The smallest droplets were 55 µm, the largest 1431 µm. An increase in the number of droplets was found with increased ventilation during the procedure. Blood droplets were more common than secretion droplets. CONCLUSION: Contamination of the visor with droplets was demonstrated. Especially in the case of TT in highly infectious patients, e.g., COVID-19 patients, the use of hooded headgear in combination with breathing apparatus with air purification and power supply is recommended to ensure best protection from infection for the surgeon and the surgical assistant.