Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 97
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
5.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e052977, 2021 10 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455721

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia is indicated in patients with an increased risk of pulmonary aspiration. The main objective of the technique is to reduce the critical time period between loss of airway protective reflexes and rapid inflation of the cuff of the endotracheal tube to minimise the chance of aspiration of gastric contents. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the importance of first-pass intubation success to ensure patient and healthcare worker safety. The aim of this study is to compare the first-pass intubation success rate (FPS) using the videolaryngoscopy compared with conventional direct laryngoscopy in surgical patients with a high risk of pulmonary aspiration. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The LARA trial is a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Consecutive patients requiring tracheal intubation are randomly allocated to either the McGrath MAC videolaryngoscope or direct laryngoscopy using the Macintosh laryngoscope. The expected rate of FPS is 92% in the McGrath group and 82% in the Macintosh group. Each group must include a total of 500 patients to achieve 90% power for detecting a difference at the 5% significance level. Successful intubation with the FPS is the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints are the time to intubation, the number of intubation attempts, the necessity of airway management alternatives, the visualisation of the glottis using the Cormack and Lehane Score and the Percentage Of Glottic Opening Score and definite adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project is approved by the local ethics committee of the Medical Association of the Rhineland Palatine state (registration number: 2020-15502) and medical ethics committee of the University of Freiburg (registration number: 21-1303). The results of this study will be made available in form of manuscripts for publication and presentations at national and international meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04794764.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , COVID-19 , Laryngoscopes , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Rapid Sequence Induction and Intubation , SARS-CoV-2
7.
BMJ Case Rep ; 14(8)2021 Aug 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367415

ABSTRACT

A previously healthy pregnant woman was diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia and was subsequently intubated. Throughout the course of her illness, the patient was treated for recurrent bouts of pneumonia. A high-resolution chest and neck CT scan confirmed the presence of a tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF), which may have been caused by the presence of the overinflated endotracheal cuff, prolonged steroid use, hypoxic injury and possible direct injury of the tracheal mucosa from COVID-19 itself. A temporising procedure, involving tracheostomy with an extended-length tracheal tube, was performed. Unfortunately, the patient succumbed to infection prior to definitive repair. This case highlights the importance of keeping a high index of suspicion for tracheal injury in patients who experience prolonged periods of intubation. It also underlies the high morbidity and mortality rate associated with TEF, although being a rare disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noninvasive Ventilation , Tracheoesophageal Fistula , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Am J Infect Control ; 49(3): 387-388, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343110

ABSTRACT

Endotracheal intubation poses high risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and other respiratory pathogens. We designed and here describe a protective drape that we believe will greatly reduce this risk. Unlike the intubation box that has been described prior, it is portable, disposable, and does not restrict operator dexterity. We have used it extensively and successfully during the height of the corona virus disease of 2019 outbreak.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Surgical Drapes , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Am J Emerg Med ; 49: 276-286, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1281376

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (PP) has been used to avoid intubations in hypoxic COVID-19 patients, but there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy. Moreover, clinicians have little information to identify patients at high risk of intubation despite awake PP. We sought to assess the intubation rate among patients treated with awake PP in our Emergency Department (ED) and identify predictors of need for intubation. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted for known or suspected COVID-19 who were treated with awake PP in the ED. We excluded patients intubated in the ED. Our primary outcome was prevalence of intubation during initial hospitalization. Other outcomes were intubation within 48 h of admission and mortality. We performed classification and regression tree analysis to identify the variables most likely to predict the need for intubation. RESULTS: We included 97 patients; 44% required intubation and 21% were intubated within 48 h of admission. Respiratory oxygenation (ROX) index and P/F (partial pressure of oxygen / fraction of inspired oxygen) ratio measured 24 h after admission were the variables most likely to predict need for intubation (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Among COVID-19 patients treated with awake PP in the ED prior to admission, ROX index and P/F ratio, particularly 24 h after admission, may be useful tools in identifying patients at high risk of intubation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Hypoxia/therapy , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Prone Position , Wakefulness , Emergency Service, Hospital , Female , Humans , Male , Maryland , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment
10.
J Surg Res ; 266: 361-365, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy improves outcomes for critically ill patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Data are limited on the use and benefit of tracheostomies for intubated, critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. During the surge in COVID 19 infections in metropolitan New York/New Jersey, our hospital cared for many COVID-19 patients who required prolonged intubation. This study describes the outcomes in COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy. METHODS: We present a case series of patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy at a single institution. Tracheostomies were performed on patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation beyond 3 wk. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and ventilator settings prior to tracheostomy were reviewed. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included time on mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Fifteen COVID-19 patients underwent tracheostomy at an average of 31 d post intubation. Two patients (13%) died. Half of our cohort was liberated from the ventilator (8 patients, 53%), with an average time to liberation of 14 ± 6 d after tracheostomy. Among patients off mechanical ventilation, 5 (63%) had their tracheostomies removed prior to discharge. The average intensive care length of stay was 47 ± 13 d (range 29-74 d) and the average hospital stay was 59 ± 16 d (range 34-103 d). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports promising outcomes in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure and need for prolonged ventilation who undergo tracheostomy during their hospitalization. Further research is warranted to establish appropriate indications for tracheostomy in COVID-19 and confirm outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Critical Illness , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
11.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 209, 2021 06 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269884

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The effect of awake prone positioning on intubation rates is not established. The aim of this trial was to investigate if a protocol for awake prone positioning reduces the rate of endotracheal intubation compared with standard care among patients with moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Adult patients with confirmed COVID-19, high-flow nasal oxygen or noninvasive ventilation for respiratory support and a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 20 kPa were randomly assigned to a protocol targeting 16 h prone positioning per day or standard care. The primary endpoint was intubation within 30 days. Secondary endpoints included duration of awake prone positioning, 30-day mortality, ventilator-free days, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, use of noninvasive ventilation, organ support and adverse events. The trial was terminated early due to futility. RESULTS: Of 141 patients assessed for eligibility, 75 were randomized of whom 39 were allocated to the control group and 36 to the prone group. Within 30 days after enrollment, 13 patients (33%) were intubated in the control group versus 12 patients (33%) in the prone group (HR 1.01 (95% CI 0.46-2.21), P = 0.99). Median prone duration was 3.4 h [IQR 1.8-8.4] in the control group compared with 9.0 h per day [IQR 4.4-10.6] in the prone group (P = 0.014). Nine patients (23%) in the control group had pressure sores compared with two patients (6%) in the prone group (difference - 18% (95% CI - 2 to - 33%); P = 0.032). There were no other differences in secondary outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The implemented protocol for awake prone positioning increased duration of prone positioning, but did not reduce the rate of intubation in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared to standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN54917435. Registered 15 June 2020 ( https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN54917435 ).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Patient Positioning/methods , Prone Position , Respiratory Insufficiency/prevention & control , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Wakefulness
13.
Intensive Care Med ; 47(6): 653-664, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263138

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The effect of the routine use of a stylet during tracheal intubation on first-attempt intubation success is unclear. We hypothesised that the first-attempt intubation success rate would be higher with tracheal tube + stylet than with tracheal tube alone. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, conducted in 32 intensive care units, we randomly assigned patients to tracheal tube + stylet or tracheal tube alone (i.e. without stylet). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with first-attempt intubation success. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients with complications related to tracheal intubation. Serious adverse events, i.e., traumatic injuries related to tracheal intubation, were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 999 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 501 (50%) to tracheal tube + stylet and 498 (50%) to tracheal tube alone. First-attempt intubation success occurred in 392 patients (78.2%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group and in 356 (71.5%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, 6.7; 95%CI 1.4-12.1; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 1.02-1.18; P = 0.01). A total of 194 patients (38.7%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group had complications related to tracheal intubation, as compared with 200 patients (40.2%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, - 1.5; 95%CI - 7.5 to 4.6; relative risk, 0.96; 95%CI 0.83-1.12; P = 0.64). The incidence of serious adverse events was 4.0% and 3.6%, respectively (absolute risk difference, 0.4; 95%CI, - 2.0 to 2.8; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 0.59-2.06. P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, using a stylet improves first-attempt intubation success.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Intubation, Intratracheal , Adult , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects
14.
Emerg Med Australas ; 33(4): 728-733, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1255059

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: In response to COVID-19, we introduced and examined the effect of a raft of modifications to standard practice on adverse events and first-attempt success (FAS) associated with ED intubation. METHODS: An analysis of prospectively collected registry data of all ED intubations over a 3-year period at an Australian Major Trauma Centre. During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, we introduced modifications to standard practice to reduce the risk to staff including: aerosolisation reduction, comprehensive personal protective equipment for all intubations, regular low fidelity simulation with 'sign-off' for all medical and nursing staff, senior clinician laryngoscopist and the introduction of pre-drawn medications. RESULTS: There were 783 patients, 136 in the COVID-19 era and 647 in the pre-COVID-19 comparator group. The rate of hypoxia was higher during the COVID-19 era compared to pre-COVID-19 (18.4% vs 9.6%, P < 0.005). This occurred despite the FAS rate remaining very high (95.6% vs 93.8%, P = 0.42) and intubation being undertaken by more senior laryngoscopists (consultant 55.9% during COVID-19 vs 22.6% pre-COVID-19, P < 0.001). Other adverse events were similar before and during COVID-19 (hypotension 12.5% vs 7.9%, P = 0.082; bradycardia 1.5% vs 0.5%, P = 0.21). Video laryngoscopy was more likely to be used during COVID-19 (95.6% vs 82.5%, P < 0.001) and induction of anaesthesia more often used ketamine (66.9% vs 42.3%, P < 0.001) and rocuronium (86.8% vs 52.1%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This raft of modifications to ED intubation was associated with significant increase in hypoxia despite a very high FAS rate and more senior first laryngoscopist.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Adult , Aged , Airway Management/standards , Airway Management/statistics & numerical data , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Quality Improvement , SARS-CoV-2
15.
J Laryngol Otol ; 135(7): 656-658, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1223056

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 critical care patients endure prolonged periods of intubation. Late tracheostomy insertion, large endotracheal tubes and high cuff pressures increase their risk of subglottic and tracheal stenosis. This patient cohort also often appears to have co-morbidities associated with laryngotracheal stenosis, including high body mass index and laryngopharyngeal reflux. METHODS: This paper presents three coronavirus disease 2019 patients who were intubated for a mean of 28 days before tracheostomy, leading to complex multi-level stenoses. RESULTS: All patients underwent multiple endoscopic tracheoplasty procedures and two required tracheal resections. There was a mean of 33.9 days between interventions. Coronavirus disease 2019 patients do not appear to respond as well to steroid, laser and balloon dilatation as other adult stenosis patients. CONCLUSION: Intubated coronavirus disease 2019 patients have an increased risk of laryngotracheal stenosis, as a result of multiple factors. Otolaryngology teams should be vigilant in investigating for this complication. International guidelines on time to tracheostomy should be followed, despite a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Laryngostenosis/etiology , Tracheal Stenosis/etiology , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Trachea/surgery , Tracheal Stenosis/surgery
16.
J Med Case Rep ; 15(1): 148, 2021 Mar 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147316

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A significant portion of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at high risk of developing intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired swallowing dysfunction (neurogenic dysphagia) as a consequence of requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES) is a simple and safe treatment for neurogenic dysphagia. It has been shown that PES can restore safe swallowing in orally intubated or tracheotomized ICU patients with neurogenic dysphagia following severe stroke. We report the case of a patient with severe neurogenic post-extubation dysphagia (PED) due to prolonged intubation and severe general muscle weakness related to COVID-19, which was successfully treated using PES. CASE PRESENTATION: A 71-year-old Caucasian female patient with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection developed neurogenic dysphagia following prolonged intubation in the ICU. To avoid aerosol-generating procedures, her swallowing function was evaluated non-instrumentally as recommended by recently published international guidelines in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Her swallowing function was markedly impaired and PES therapy was recommended. PES led to a rapid improvement of the PED, as evaluated by bedside swallowing assessments using the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS) and Dysphagia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS), and diet screening using the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS). The improved swallowing, as reflected by these measures, allowed this patient to transfer from the ICU to a non-intensive medical department 5 days after completing PES treatment. CONCLUSIONS: PES treatment contributed to the restoration of a safe swallowing function in this critically ill patient with COVID-19 and ICU-acquired swallowing dysfunction. Early clinical bedside swallowing assessment and dysphagia intervention in COVID-19 patients is crucial to optimize their full recovery. PES may contribute to a safe and earlier ICU discharge of patients with ICU-acquired swallowing dysfunction. Earlier ICU discharge and reduced rates of re-intubation following PES can help alleviate some of the pressure on ICU bed capacity, which is critical in times of a health emergency such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Deglutition Disorders/therapy , Electric Stimulation Therapy/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Pharynx , Recovery of Function , Aged , Deglutition Disorders/etiology , Deglutition Disorders/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
18.
Anesth Analg ; 132(1): 38-45, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1124821

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Numerous barrier devices have recently been developed and rapidly deployed worldwide in an effort to protect health care workers (HCWs) from exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during high-risk procedures. However, only a few studies have examined their impact on the dispersion of droplets and aerosols, which are both thought to be significant contributors to the spread of COVID-19. METHODS: Two commonly used barrier devices, an intubation box and a clear plastic intubation sheet, were evaluated using a physiologically accurate cough simulator. Aerosols were modeled using a commercially available fog machine, and droplets were modeled with fluorescein dye. Both particles were propelled by the cough simulator in a simulated intubation environment. Data were captured by high-speed flash photography, and aerosol and droplet dispersion were assessed qualitatively with and without a barrier in place. RESULTS: Droplet contamination after a simulated cough was seemingly contained by both barrier devices. Simulated aerosol escaped the barriers and flowed toward the head of the bed. During barrier removal, simulated aerosol trapped underneath was released and propelled toward the HCW at the head of the bed. Usage of the intubation sheet concentrated droplets onto a smaller area. If no barrier was used, positioning the patient in slight reverse Trendelenburg directed aerosols away from the HCW located at the head of the bed. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations imply that intubation boxes and sheets may reduce HCW exposure to droplets, but they both may merely redirect aerosolized particles, potentially resulting in increased exposure to aerosols in certain circumstances. Aerosols may remain within the barrier device after a cough, and manipulation of the box may release them. Patients should be positioned to facilitate intubation, but slight reverse Trendelenburg may direct infectious aerosols away from the HCW. Novel barrier devices should be used with caution, and further validation studies are necessary.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Infection Control/instrumentation , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Inhalation Exposure/prevention & control , Intubation, Intratracheal , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Personal Protective Equipment , Aerosols , COVID-19/transmission , Humans , Inhalation Exposure/adverse effects , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Manikins , Materials Testing , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Health
19.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl ; 103(5): e144-e147, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1120812

ABSTRACT

The current global COVID-19 pandemic is caused by the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Currently, acquired tracheoesophageal fistulas are mainly iatrogenic lesions produced by prolonged tracheal intubation. We present a case of tracheoesophageal fistula with severe tracheal stenosis following tracheal intubation in a patient with SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Tracheal Stenosis/surgery , Tracheoesophageal Fistula/surgery , Adult , Anastomosis, Surgical/methods , Bronchoscopy/methods , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Male , Operating Rooms , Patient Isolators , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Tracheal Stenosis/etiology , Tracheoesophageal Fistula/etiology
20.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 138(6): 443-449, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1116608

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To analyse tracheostomies after intubation for SARS-Cov-2 infection performed by otorhinolaryngologists in 7 university hospitals in the Paris area of France during the month March 24 to April 23, 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentre retrospective observational study included 59 consecutive patients. The main goals were to evaluate the number, characteristics and practical conditions of tracheostomies, and the COVID-19 status of the otorhinolaryngologists. Secondary goals were to analyse tracheostomy time, decannulation rate, immediate postoperative complications and laryngotracheal axis status. RESULTS: Tracheostomy indications were for ventilatory weaning and extubation failure in 86% and 14% of cases, respectively. The technique was surgical, percutaneous or hybrid in 91.5%, 3.4% and 5.1% of cases, respectively. None of the operators developed symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Postoperative complications occurred in 15% of cases, with no significant difference between surgical and percutaneous/hybrid techniques (P=0.33), although no complications occurred after percutaneous or hybrid tracheostomies. No procedures or complications resulted in death. The decannulation rate was 74.5% with a mean tracheostomy time of 20±12 days. In 55% of the patients evaluated by flexible endoscopy after decannulation, a laryngeal abnormality was found. On univariate analysis, no clinical features had a significant influence on tracheostomy time, decannulation rate or occurrence of laryngeal lesions. CONCLUSION: The main findings of the present retrospective study were: absence of contamination of the surgeons, heterogeneity of practices between centres, a high rate of complications and laryngeal lesions whatever the technique, and the specificities of the patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Surgeons , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Paris , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...