Early Intervention for the Treatment of Acute Laryngeal Injury After Intubation.

Importance: Patients with laryngeal injury after endotracheal intubation often present long after initial injury with mature fibrosis compromising cricoarytenoid joint mobility and glottic function. Objective: To compare functional outcomes between early and late intervention for intubation-related laryngeal injury. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study involved 29 patients with laryngeal injury resulting from endotracheal intubation who were evaluated at a tertiary care center between May 1, 2014, and June 1, 2018. Ten patients with intubation injury to the posterior glottis who received early treatment were compared with 19 patients presenting with posterior glottic stenosis who received late treatment. Statistical analysis was performed from May 1 to July 1, 2019. Exposures: Early intervention, defined as a procedure performed 45 days or less after intubation, and late treatment, defined as an intervention performed greater than 45 days after intubation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-specific and intervention-specific covariates were compared between the 2 groups, absolute differences with 95% CIs were calculated, and time to tracheostomy decannulation was compared using log-rank testing. Results: The 2 groups had similar demographic characteristics and a similar burden of comorbid disease. Ten patients who received early intervention (7 women [70%]; median age, 59.7 years [range, 31-72 years]; median, 34.7 days to presentation [IQR, 1.5-44.8 days]) were compared with 19 patients who received late intervention (11 women [58%]; median age, 53.8 years [range, 34-73 years]; median, 341.9 days to presentation [IQR, 132.7-376.3 days]). Nine of 10 patients (90%) who received early intervention and 11 of 19 patients (58%) who received late interventions were decannulated at last follow-up (absolute difference, 32%; 95% CI, -3% to 68%). Patients who received early treatment required fewer total interventions than patients with mature lesions (mean, 2.2 vs 11.5; absolute difference, 9.3; 95% CI, 6.4-12.1). In addition, none of the patients who received early treatment required an open procedure, whereas 17 patients (90%) with mature lesions required open procedures to pursue decannulation. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that early intervention for patients with postintubation laryngeal injury was associated with a decreased duration of tracheostomy dependence, a higher rate of decannulation, and fewer surgical procedures compared with late intervention. Patients who underwent early intervention also avoided open reconstruction. These findings may bear relevance to the management of patients requiring extended durations of endotracheal intubation during recovery for critical illness related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Pediatric Otolaryngology Telehealth in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned and Impact on the Future Management of Pediatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic outpatient medicine has drastically been altered how it is delivered. This time period likely represents the largest volume of telehealth visits in the United States health care history. Telehealth presents unique challenges within each subspecialty, and pediatric otolaryngology is no different. This retrospective review was designed to evaluate our division of pediatric otolaryngology's experience with telehealth during the COVID19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. All telehealth and face-to-face visits for the month of April 2020 completed by the Pediatric Otolaryngology Division were reviewed. A survey, utilizing both open-ended questions and Likert scaled questions was distributed to the 16 pediatric otolaryngology providers in our group to reflect their experience with telehealth during the 1-month study period. RESULTS: In April, 2020 our outpatient clinic performed a total of 877 clinic visits compared to 2260 clinic visits in April 2019. A total of 769 (88%) were telehealth visits. Telemedicine with video comprised 523 (68%) and telephone only comprised 246 (32%). There were 0 telehealth visits in April 2019. Interpretive services were required in 9.3% (N = 211) clinic visits in April 2019 and 7.5% (N = 66) of clinic visits in April 2020. The survey demonstrated a significant difference (P < .00002) in provider's anticipated telehealth experience (mean 3.94, 95% CI [3.0632, 4.8118] compared to their actual experience after the study period (mean 7.5, 95% CI [7.113, 7.887]. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low initial expectations for telehealth, the majority of our providers felt after 1 month of use that telehealth would continue to be a valuable platform post-pandemic clinical practice. Limited physical exam, particularly otoscopy, nasal endoscopy, and nasolaryngoscopy present challenges. However, with adequate information and preparation for the parents and for the physician some of the obstacles can be overcome.