Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 101
Filter
1.
Rev. Col. Bras. Cir ; 49: e20223202, 2022. graf
Article in English | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-1760016

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT 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.


RESUMO A traqueostomia percutânea tem sido considerada o método padrão atualmente, sendo a técnica guiada por broncoscopia a mais realizada. Uma alternativa segura é a traqueostomia percutânea guiada por ultrassonografia, que pode ser feita pelo próprio cirurgião, evitando-se as dificuldades logísticas de disponibilidade de um especialista em broncoscopia. Estudos comprovam que a eficácia e a segurança da técnica guiada por ultrassonografia, comparada à guiada por broncoscopia, são semelhantes. Assim, é de suma importância que os cirurgiões tenham a traqueostomia percutânea guiada por ultrassonografia como alternativa viável e benéfica em relação ao procedimento aberto. Neste artigo, descrevemos oito passos principais da realização da traqueostomia percutânea ecoguiada, destacando pontos técnicos essenciais que podem reduzir o risco de complicações do procedimento. Ainda, detalhamos alguns cuidados que devem ser observados, com o intuito de reduzir o risco de aerolização e contaminação da equipe, quando a traqueostomia percutânea é indicada no paciente com COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Humans , Tracheostomy/methods , COVID-19 , Bronchoscopy/methods , Ultrasonography , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods
3.
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol ; 35(2): 236-241, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1672285

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/prevention & control , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Tracheostomy/methods
5.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261024, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1623650

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospitals, University , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Paris , Personnel, Hospital , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
7.
Am Surg ; 87(11): 1775-1782, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511589

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed New York City hospitals early in the pandemic. Shortages of ventilators and sedatives prompted tracheostomy earlier than recommended by professional societies. This study evaluates the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) in COVID+ patients on critical care capacity. METHODS: This is a single-institution prospective case series of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients undergoing PDT from April 1 to June 4, 2020 at a public tertiary care center. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients met PDT criteria and underwent PDT at a median of 13 days (IQR 10, 18) from intubation. Patient characteristics are found in Table 1. Intravenous midazolam, fentanyl, and cisatracurium equivalents were significantly reduced 48 hours post-PDT (Table 2). Thirty-five patients were transferred from the ICU and liberated from the ventilator. Median time from PDT to ventilator liberation and ICU discharge was 10 (IQR 4, 14) and 12 (IQR 8, 17) days, respectively. Decannulation occurred in 45.5% and 52.7% were discharged from acute inpatient care (Figure 1). Median follow-up for the study was 62 days. Four patients had bleeding complications postoperatively and 11 died during the study period. Older age was associated with increased odds of complication (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04, 1.23) and death (OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.05, 1.30). All operators tested negative for COVID-19 during the study period. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within the standard time frame can improve critical care capacity in areas strained by the pandemic with low risk to operators. Long-term outcomes after PDT deserve further study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Tracheostomy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
8.
Crit Care Med ; 49(7): 1058-1067, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494030

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation and the risk for healthcare providers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study; patients were enrolled between March 11, and April 29, 2020. The date of final follow-up was July 30, 2020. We used a propensity score matching approach to compare outcomes. Study outcomes were formulated before data collection and analysis. SETTING: Critical care units at two large metropolitan hospitals in New York City. PATIENTS: Five-hundred forty-one patients with confirmed severe coronavirus disease 2019 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy with modified visualization and ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Required time for discontinuation off mechanical ventilation, total length of hospitalization, and overall patient survival. Of the 541 patients, 394 patients were eligible for a tracheostomy. One-hundred sixteen were early percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with median time of 9 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 7-12 d), whereas 89 were late percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with a median time of 19 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 16-24 d). Compared with patients with no tracheostomy, patients with an early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had a higher probability of discontinuation from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference, 30%; p < 0.001; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.34-5.84; p = 0.006) and a lower mortality (absolute difference, 34%, p < 0.001; hazard ratio for death, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06-0.22; p < 0.001). Compared with patients with late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy, patients with early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had higher discontinuation rates from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference 7%; p < 0.35; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.3; p = 0.04) and had a shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors (absolute difference, -15 d; p < 0.001). None of the healthcare providers who performed all the percutaneous dilational tracheostomies procedures had clinical symptoms or any positive laboratory test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: In coronavirus disease 2019 patients on mechanical ventilation, an early modified percutaneous dilational tracheostomy was safe for patients and healthcare providers and associated with improved clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , Cohort Studies , Critical Care , Dilatation/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
9.
Pulmonology ; 28(1): 18-27, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1415746

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Invasively ventilated patients with acute respiratory failure related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) potentially benefit from tracheostomy. The aim of this study was to determine the practice of tracheostomy during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020 in the Netherlands, to ascertain whether timing of tracheostomy had an association with outcome, and to identify factors that had an association with timing. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the 'PRactice of VENTilation in COVID-19' (PRoVENT-COVID) study, a multicenter observational study, conducted from March 1, 2020 through June 1, 2020 in 22 Dutch intensive care units (ICU) in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients receiving tracheostomy; secondary endpoints were timing of tracheostomy, duration of ventilation, length of stay in ICU and hospital, mortality, and factors associated with timing. RESULTS: Of 1023 patients, 189 patients (18.5%) received a tracheostomy at median 21 [17 to 28] days from start of ventilation. Timing was similar before and after online publication of an amendment to the Dutch national guidelines on tracheostomy focusing on COVID-19 patients (21 [17-28] vs. 21 [17-26] days). Tracheostomy performed ≤ 21 days was independently associated with shorter duration of ventilation (median 26 [21 to 32] vs. 40 [34 to 47] days) and higher mortality in ICU (22.1% vs. 10.2%), hospital (26.1% vs. 11.9%) and at day 90 (27.6% vs. 14.6%). There were no patient demographics or ventilation characteristics that had an association with timing of tracheostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomy was performed late in COVID-19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic in the Netherlands and timing of tracheostomy possibly had an association with outcome. However, prospective studies are needed to further explore these associations. It remains unknown which factors influenced timing of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , Ventilation
10.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 316, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1379798

ABSTRACT

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2021. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2021 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Tracheostomy , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Critical Care , Humans , RNA, Viral/blood , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Time-to-Treatment , Tracheostomy/methods
11.
J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol ; 29(2): 125-130, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341142

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Tracheostomy/methods
12.
Braz J Anesthesiol ; 72(2): 189-193, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1330668

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous dilation tracheostomy is an aerosol-generating procedure carrying a documented infectious risk during respiratory virus pandemics. For this reason, during the COVID-19 outbreak, surgical tracheostomy was preferred to the percutaneous one, despite the technique related complications increased risk. METHODS: We describe a new sequence for percutaneous dilation tracheostomy procedure that could be considered safe both for patients and healthcare personnel. A fiberscope was connected to a video unit to allow bronchoscopy. Guidewire positioning was performed as usual. While the established standard procedure continues with the creation of the stoma without any change in mechanical ventilation, we retracted the bronchoscope until immediately after the access valve in the mount tube, allowing normal ventilation. After 3 minutes of ventilation with 100% oxygen, mechanical ventilation was stopped without disconnecting the circuit. During apnea, the stoma was created by dilating the trachea and the tracheostomy cannula was inserted. Ventilation was then resumed. We evaluated the safeness of the procedure by recording any severe desaturation and by performing serological tests to all personnel. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients (38%) of 96 underwent tracheostomy; 22 (23%) percutaneous dilation tracheostomies with the new approach were performed without any desaturation. All personnel (150 operators) were evaluated for serological testing: 9 (6%) had positive serology but none of them had participated in tracheostomy procedures. CONCLUSION: This newly described percutaneous dilation tracheostomy technique was not related to severe desaturation events and we did not observe any positive serological test in health workers who performed the tracheostomies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Tracheostomy , Apnea/etiology , Humans , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Tracheostomy/methods
13.
Ann Surg ; 274(2): 234-239, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1304022

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/virology , Tracheostomy/methods , Adult , Aged , Cross Infection/transmission , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheotomy/methods , United States
14.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 238, 2021 07 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1300260

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Current practices regarding tracheostomy in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome are unknown. Our objectives were to assess the prevalence and the association between the timing of tracheostomy (during or after ECMO weaning) and related complications, sedative, and analgesic use. METHODS: International, multicenter, retrospective study in four large volume ECMO centers during a 9-year period. RESULTS: Of the 1,168 patients treated with ECMO for severe ARDS (age 48 ± 16 years, 76% male, SAPS II score 51 ± 18) during the enrollment period, 353 (30%) and 177 (15%) underwent tracheostomy placement during or after ECMO, respectively. Severe complications were uncommon in both groups. Local bleeding within 24 h of tracheostomy was four times more frequent during ECMO (25 vs 7% after ECMO, p < 0.01). Cumulative sedative consumption decreased more rapidly after the procedure with sedative doses almost negligible 48-72 h later, when tracheostomy was performed after ECMO decannulation (p < 0.01). A significantly increased level of consciousness was observed within 72 h after tracheostomy in the "after ECMO" group, whereas it was unchanged in the "during-ECMO" group. CONCLUSION: In contrast to patients undergoing tracheostomy after ECMO decannulation, tracheostomy during ECMO was neither associated with a decrease in sedation and analgesia levels nor with an increase in the level of consciousness. This finding together with a higher risk of local bleeding in the days following the procedure reinforces the need for a case-by-case discussion on the balance between risks and benefits of tracheotomy when performed during ECMO.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Tracheostomy/methods , Adult , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/statistics & numerical data , Female , France/epidemiology , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Internationality , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Simplified Acute Physiology Score , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
15.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 42(6): 103102, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1260644

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy is one of the most common surgical procedures performed on ventilated COVID-19 patients, yet the appropriate timing for operating is controversial. OBJECTIVES: Assessing the effect of early tracheostomy on mortality and decannulation; elucidating changes in ventilation parameters, vasopressors and sedatives dosages immediately following the procedure. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 38 ventilated COVID-19 patients, 19 of them (50%) underwent tracheostomy within 7 days of intubation (early tracheostomy group) and the rest underwent tracheostomy after 8 days or more (late tracheostomy group). RESULTS: Decannulation rates were significantly higher while mortality rates were non-significantly lower in the early tracheostomy group compared with the late tracheostomy group (58% vs 21% p < 0.05; 42% vs 74% p = 0.1, respectively). Tidal volume increased (446 ml vs 483 ml; p = 0.02) while PEEP (13 cmH20 vs 11.6 cmH2O, p = 0.04) decreased at the immediate time following the procedure. No staff member participating in the procedures was infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. CONCLUSION: Early tracheostomy might offer improved outcomes with higher decannulation rates and lower mortality rates in ventilated COVID-19 patients, yet larger scale studies are needed. Most likely, early exposure to COVID-19 patients with appropriate personal protective equipment during open tracheostomy does not put the surgical team at risk.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Respiration, Artificial , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Device Removal/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Tidal Volume , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data
16.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 42(6): 103090, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1242863

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Currently we are faced with countless patients with prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the consequent increase in the need for tracheostomies and the risks that this includes for both patients and staff. OBJECTIVE: It is necessary to establish a safety protocol for the performance of percutaneous tracheostomies in order to reduce the associated infections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 77 patients underwent tracheostomies between March 2020 and March 2021, evaluating the safety of the protocol and the rate of contagion among the staff. RESULTS: Percutaneous tracheostomy was performed according to the protocol in 72 patients, 5 were excluded due to unfavorable anatomy or other reasons. There were no cases of SARS COVID-19 contagion among health personnel attributable to the procedure during the three-week follow-up period. There were no surgical complications in this series. CONCLUSION: The authors recommend implementing security protocols such as the one discussed in this work, given its low contagion rate and ease of implementation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Medical Staff/statistics & numerical data , Risk , Safety , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/methods
17.
Laryngoscope ; 131(12): E2849-E2856, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1242750

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Report long-term tracheostomy outcomes in patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Review of prospectively collected data. METHODS: Prospectively collected data were extracted for adults with COVID-19 undergoing percutaneous or open tracheostomy between April 4, 2020 and June 2, 2020 at a major medical center in New York City. The primary endpoint was weaning from mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included sedation weaning, decannulation, and discharge. RESULTS: One hundred one patients underwent tracheostomy, including 48 percutaneous (48%) and 53 open (52%), after a median intubation time of 24 days (IQR 20, 31). The most common complication was minor bleeding (n = 18, 18%). The all-cause mortality rate was 15% and no deaths were attributable to the tracheostomy. Eighty-three patients (82%) were weaned off mechanical ventilation, 88 patients (87%) were weaned off sedation, and 72 patients (71%) were decannulated. Censored median times from tracheostomy to sedation and ventilator weaning were 8 (95% CI 6-11) and 18 (95% CI 14-22) days, respectively (uncensored: 7 and 15 days). Median time from tracheostomy to decannulation was 36 (95% CI 32-47) days (uncensored: 32 days). Of those decannulated, 82% were decannulated during their index admission. There were no differences in outcomes or complication rates between percutaneous and open tracheostomy. Likelihood of discharge from the ICU was inversely related to intubation time, though the clinical relevance of this was small (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.943-0.998; P = .037). CONCLUSION: Tracheostomy by either percutaneous or open technique facilitated sedation and ventilator weaning in patients with COVID-19 after prolonged intubation. Additional study on the optimal timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:E2849-E2856, 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , Airway Extubation/mortality , Airway Extubation/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Conscious Sedation/mortality , Conscious Sedation/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/mortality , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/mortality , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/mortality , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
19.
MedEdPORTAL ; 17: 11134, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1170589

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In a CICO (cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate) situation, anesthesiologists and acute care physicians must be able to perform an emergency surgical cricothyrotomy (front-of-neck airway procedure). CICOs are high-acuity situations with rare opportunities for safe practice. In COVID-19 airway management guidelines, bougie-assisted surgical cricothyrotomy is the recommended emergency strategy for CICO situations. Methods: We designed a 4-hour procedural simulation workshop on surgical cricothyrotomy to train 16 medical residents. We provided prerequisite readings, a lecture, and a videotaped demonstration. Two clinical scenarios introduced deliberate practice on partial-task neck simulators and fresh human cadavers. We segmented an evidence-based procedure and asked participants to verbalize the five steps of the procedure on multiple occasions. Results: Thirty-two residents who participated in the workshops were surveyed, with a 97% response rate (16 of 16 from anesthesiology, 15 of 16 from emergency medicine). Participants commented positively on the workshop's authenticity, its structure, the quality of the feedback provided, and its perceived impact on improving skills in surgical cricothyrotomy. We analyzed narrative comments related to three domains: preparation for the procedure, performing the procedure, and maintaining the skills. Participants highlighted the importance of performing the procedure many times and mentioned the representativeness of fresh cadavers. Discussion: We developed a surgical cricothyrotomy simulation workshop for anesthesiology and emergency medicine residents. Residents in the two specialities uniformly appreciated its format and content. We identified common pitfalls when executing the procedure and provided practical tips and material to facilitate implementation, in particular to face the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Anesthesiology/education , COVID-19/surgery , Emergency Medicine/education , Internship and Residency , Simulation Training , Tracheostomy/education , Adult , Airway Management/methods , Cadaver , Humans , Pandemics , Tracheostomy/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL