Association of Tracheostomy With Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Tracheostomy is associated with decreased in-hospital mortality during severe COVID-19 infection

Objective

Tracheostomy is often performed in patients with a prolonged course of endotracheal intubation. This study sought to examine the clinical utility of tracheostomy during severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

Study Design

A retrospective single-system, multicenter observational cohort study was performed on patients intubated for COVID-19 infection. Patients who received intubation alone were compared with patients who received intubation and subsequent tracheostomy. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital courses were analyzed.

Setting

The University of Pennsylvania Health System from 2020 to 2021.

Methods

Logistic regression analysis was performed on patient demographics and comorbidities. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated depending on whether patients received a tracheostomy.

Results

Of 777 intubated patients, 452 were male (58.2%) and 325 were female (41.8%) with a median age of 63 (interquartile range [IQR]: 54-73) years. One-hundred and eighty-five (23.8%) patients underwent tracheostomy. The mean time from intubation to tracheostomy was (17.3 ± 9.7) days. Patients who underwent tracheostomy were less likely to expire during their hospitalization than those who did not undergo tracheostomy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.31, P < 0.001), and patient age was positively associated with mortality (OR = 1.04 per year, P < 0.001). Likelihood of receiving tracheostomy was positively associated with being on extra-corporeal membranous oxygenation (ECMO) (OR = 101.10, P < 0.001), immunocompromised status (OR = 3.61, P = 0.002), and current tobacco smoking (OR = 4.81, P = 0.041). Tracheostomy was also associated with a significantly longer hospital length of stay ([57.5 ± 32.2] days vs. [19.9 ± 18.1] days, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Tracheostomy was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality, despite also being associated with increased comorbidities. Tracheostomy should not be held back from patients with comorbidities for this reason alone and may even improve survival in high-risk patients.

Discharge destination following elective and emergency surgical tracheostomies in head and neck cancer patients

OBJECTIVES

Tracheostomy in the setting of head and neck cancer may be performed either electively for prophylactic airway protection in an ablative procedure, or as an emergency due to impending airway obstruction in the setting of an obstructing upper aerodigestive tract malignancy. Tracheostomy care has biopsychosocial implications, which may require a higher level of care from carers, post-acute care, or placement into care facilities. Existing database studies have largely excluded patients with a history of head and neck cancer. This study aims to examine and compare discharge destinations for head and neck cancer patients requiring either elective or emergency surgical tracheostomies.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study (January 2010-December 2019) of adult head and neck cancer patients undergoing surgical tracheostomy in a tertiary Australian hospital network. Primary outcome was discharge destination. Secondary outcomes were mortality, morbidity, and decannulation timing.

RESULTS

Of 188 patients (47 emergency, 141 elective), 83.0 % returned to their pre-morbid accommodation, either directly home (54.6 %), or with additional community-based services (27.7 %). There was a significant difference in post-discharge destination (p = 0.012). Emergency patients were less likely to return home compared to elective patients (OR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.32-1.79), and more likely to require additional supports on discharge(67.6 %) compared to elective(41.9 %) patients. However, these outcomes did not demonstrate statistical significance. Emergency tracheostomy patients were at higher risk of permanent tracheostomy, unplanned readmission within 30 days, and longer time to successful decannulation.

CONCLUSION

Emergency tracheostomy patients are likely to return to their pre-morbid place of residence but may require additional support.

The COVID-19 Tracheostomy Experience at a Large Academic Medical Center in New York during the First Year

Background: New York City was the epicenter of the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Tracheostomy is a critical procedure in the care of patients with COVID-19. We hypothesized that early tracheostomy would decrease the length of time on sedation, time on mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay, and mortality. Methods: A retrospective analysis of outcomes for all patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at the Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City, New York. All adult intensive care units at the Mount Sinai Hospital, New York. Patients/subjects: 888 patients admitted to intensive care with COVID-19. Results: All patients admitted to the intensive care unit with COVID-19 (888) from 1 March 2020 to 1 March 2021 were analyzed and separated further into those intubated (544) and those requiring tracheostomy (177). Of those receiving tracheostomy, outcomes were analyzed for early (≤12 days) or late (>12 days) tracheostomy. Demographics, medical history, laboratory values, type of oxygen and ventilatory support, and clinical outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Conclusions: Early tracheostomy resulted in reduced duration of mechanical ventilation, reduced hospital length of stay, and reduced intensive care unit length of stay in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with COVID-19. There was no effect on overall mortality.

A retrospective analysis of COVID-19 tracheostomies: Early versus late tracheostomy

Objectives

To assess the impact of early tracheostomy (ET) versus late tracheostomy (LT) placement on mortality and decannulation rates of COVID patients.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients infected with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy tube placement in an Ochsner-affiliated hospital from March 2020 to May 2022. Patients were identified using the electronic medical record and data was collated using the "Epic SlicerDicer" tool. Descriptive statistics were gathered and compared between patients who underwent ET placement and those who underwent LT placement. Patient demographics, previous medical history, tracheostomy procedural details, arterial blood gases, complications, and outcomes including time to wean from the ventilator, and time to decannulation were recorded.

Results

Two-hundred nineteen patients were included in the study. There were no statistically significant differences in liberation from mechanical ventilation rates between early and LT (62% vs. 55%, p = .19), or in decannulation rates (40% vs. 32%, p = .14). The mean duration of time to liberation from mechanical ventilation for early trach was 13.88 versus 18.17 days for late trach, however, no statistically significant difference was found (p = .12). Similarly, mean duration of time to decannulation was 41.17 days for early versus 47.72 for late trach (p = .15).

Conclusion

Contrary to some studies in the literature, the results presented here suggest ETs are not associated with hastened liberation from mechanical ventilation or increased decannulation rates. Further prospective studies may be warranted in assessing the impact of early versus LT in the COVID patient population.

Level of Evidence

III.

Cricotracheostomy for patients with severe COVID-19: A case control study

Background

Tracheostomy is an important procedure for the treatment of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Older age and obesity have been reported to be associated with the risk of severe COVID-19 and prolonged intubation, and anticoagulants are often administered in patients with severe COVID-19; these factors are also related to a higher risk of tracheostomy. Cricotracheostomy, a modified procedure for opening the airway through intentional partial cricoid cartilage resection, was recently reported to be useful in cases with low-lying larynx, obesity, stiff neck, and bleeding tendency. Here, we investigated the usefulness and safety of cricotracheostomy for severe COVID-19 patients.

Materials and methods

Fifteen patients with severe COVID-19 who underwent cricotracheostomy between January 2021 and April 2022 with a follow-up period of ≥ 14 days were included in this study. Forty patients with respiratory failure not related to COVID-19 who underwent traditional tracheostomy between January 2015 and April 2022 comprised the control group. Data were collected from medical records and comprised age, sex, body mass index, interval from intubation to tracheostomy, use of anticoagulants, complications of tracheostomy, and decannulation.

Results

Age, sex, and days from intubation to tracheostomy were not significantly different between the COVID-19/cricotracheostomy and control/traditional tracheostomy groups. Body mass index was significantly higher in the COVID-19 group than that in the control group (P = 0.02). The rate of use of anticoagulants was significantly higher in the COVID-19 group compared with the control group (P < 0.01). Peri-operative bleeding, subcutaneous emphysema, and stomal infection rates were not different between the groups, while stomal granulation was significantly less in the COVID-19 group (P = 0.04).

Conclusions

These results suggest that cricotracheostomy is a safe procedure in patients with severe COVID-19.

Tracheostomies of Patients With COVID-19: A Survey of Infection Reported by Health Care Professionals

BACKGROUND

Health care professionals (HCPs) performing tracheostomies in patients with COVID-19 may be at increased risk of infection.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate factors underlying HCPs' COVID-19 infection and determine whether tracheostomy providers report increased rates of infection.

METHODS

An anonymous international survey examining factors associated with COVID-19 infection was made available November 2020 through July 2021 to HCPs at a convenience sample of hospitals, universities, and professional organizations. Infections reported were compared between HCPs involved in tracheostomy on patients with COVID-19 and HCPs who were not involved.

RESULTS

Of the 361 respondents (from 33 countries), 50% (n = 179) had performed tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19. Performing tracheostomies on patients with COVID-19 was not associated with increased infection in either univariable (P = .06) or multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.90-2.46; P = .13). Working in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC) was associated with increased infection in both univariable (P < .001) and multivariable analysis (odds ratio, 2.88; CI, 1.50-5.53; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Performing tracheostomy was not associated with COVID-19 infection, suggesting that tracheostomies can be safely performed in infected patients with appropriate precautions. However, HCPs in LMICs may face increased infection risk.

What Have We Learned About Transmission of COVID-19: Implications for PFT and Pulmonary Procedures

Because of the potential for high aerosol transmission during pulmonary function testing and pulmonary procedures, performing these tests and procedures must be considered carefully during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Much has been learned about the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by aerosols and the potential for such transmission through pulmonary function tests and pulmonary procedures, and subsequently preventative practices have been enhanced and developed to reduce the risk of transmission of virus to patients and personnel. This article reviews what is known about the potential for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 during pulmonary function testing and pulmonary procedures and the recommended mitigation steps to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

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.

Impact of Early Tracheostomy on Weaning From Ventilation and Sedation in COVID-19 Pregnant and Early Postpartum Patient: Two Case Reports

Pregnant women are at high risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) complications, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and the need for mechanical ventilation. There is no literature on the optimal strategy for the management of difficult-to-wean pregnant and early postpartum patients.

We report two cases of pregnant women with COVID-19 pneumonia and ARDS, who required mechanical ventilation and high doses of analgesia, and sedation with neuromuscular blocking agents to facilitate ventilation and oxygenation. Both patients had a tracheostomy procedure to facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation and sedation. Shortly after tracheostomy, sedation and analgesia, along with ventilatory support were weaned off. Both patients were discharged home. These cases propose early tracheostomy as a strategy to facilitate weaning from mechanical ventilation and sedation in pregnant and early postpartum patients.

Tracheostomy Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 at a New York City Hospital

Objective

Tracheostomies have been performed in patients with prolonged intubation due to COVID-19. Understanding outcomes in different populations is crucial to tackle future epidemics.

Study Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Tertiary academic medical center in New York City.

Methods

A prospectively collected database of patients with COVID-19 undergoing open tracheostomy between March 2020 and April 2020 was reviewed. Primary endpoints were weaning from the ventilator and from sedation and time to decannulation.

Results

Sixty-six patients underwent tracheostomy. There were 42 males (64%) with an average age of 62 years (range, 23-91). Patients were intubated for a median time of 26 days prior to tracheostomy (interquartile range [IQR], 23-30). The median time to weaning from ventilatory support after tracheostomy was 18 days (IQR, 10-29). Of those sedated at the time of tracheostomy, the median time to discontinuation of sedation was 5 days (IQR, 3-9). Of patients who survived, 39 (69%) were decannulated. Of those decannulated before discharge (n = 39), the median time to decannulation was 36 days (IQR, 27-49) following tracheostomy. The median time from ventilator liberation to decannulation was 14 days (IQR, 8-22). Thirteen patients (20.0%) had minor bleeding requiring packing. Two patients (3%) had bleeding requiring neck exploration. The all-cause mortality rate was 10.6%. No patients died of procedural causes, and no surgeons acquired COVID-19.

Conclusion

Open tracheostomies were successfully and safely performed at our institution in the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority of patients were successfully weaned from the ventilator and sedation. Approximately 60% of patients were decannulated prior to hospital discharge.

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.

Clinical Outcomes of Early Versus Late Tracheostomy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients require admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Tracheostomy is increasingly performed when a prolonged course of IMV is anticipated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine clinical and resource utilization benefits of early versus late tracheostomy among COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase were used to identify relevant studies comparing outcomes of COVID-19 patients undergoing early and late tracheostomy from January 1, 2020, to December 1, 2021.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were selected, and 2222 critically ill COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January to December 2020 were included. Among the included patients, 34.5% and 65.5% underwent early and late tracheostomy, respectively. Among the included studies, 58.3% and 41.7% defined early tracheostomy using cutoffs of 14 and 10 days, respectively. All-cause in-hospital mortality was not different between the early and late tracheostomy groups (32.9% vs. 33.1%; OR = 1.00; P = 0.98). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated a similar mortality rate in studies using a cutoff of 10 days (34.6% vs. 35.5%; OR = 0.97; P = 0.89) or 14 days (31.2% vs. 27.7%; OR = 1.05; P = 0.78). The early tracheostomy group had shorter ICU length of stay (LOS) (mean: 23.18 vs. 30.51 days; P < 0.001) and IMV duration (mean: 20.49 vs. 28.94 days; P < 0.001) than the late tracheostomy group. The time from tracheostomy to decannulation was longer (mean: 23.36 vs. 16.24 days; P = 0.02) in the early tracheostomy group than in the late tracheostomy group, but the time from tracheostomy to IMV weaning was similar in both groups. Other clinical characteristics, including age, were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Early tracheostomy reduced the ICU LOS and IMV duration among COVID-19 patients compared with late tracheostomy, but the mortality rate was similar in both groups. The findings have important implications for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, especially in a resource-limited setting.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 contamination in the operating room and birthing room setting: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The exposure risks to front-line health care workers caring for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing surgery or obstetric delivery are unclear, and an understanding of sample types that may harbour virus is important for evaluating risk. We sought to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection undergoing surgery or obstetric delivery was present in the peritoneal cavity of male and female patients, in the female reproductive tract, in the environment of the surgery or delivery suite (surgical instruments or equipment used, air or floors), and inside the masks of the attending health care workers.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study from November 2020 to May 2021 at 2 tertiary academic Toronto hospitals, during urgent surgeries or obstetric deliveries for patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA in patient, environmental and air samples was identified by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Air samples were collected using both active and passive sampling techniques. The primary outcome was the proportion of health care workers' masks positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. We included adult patients with positive RT-PCR nasal swab undergoing obstetric delivery or urgent surgery (from across all surgical specialties).

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients (age 20-88 yr) were included. Nine patients had obstetric deliveries (6 cesarean deliveries), and 23 patients (14 male) required urgent surgery from the orthopedic or trauma, general surgery, burn, plastic surgery, cardiac surgery, neurosurgery, vascular surgery, gastroenterology and gynecologic oncology divisions. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 20 of 332 (6%) patient and environmental samples collected: 4 of 24 (17%) patient samples, 5 of 60 (8%) floor samples, 1 of 54 (2%) air samples, 10 of 23 (43%) surgical instrument or equipment samples, 0 of 24 cautery filter samples and 0 of 143 (95% confidence interval 0-0.026) inner surface of mask samples.

INTERPRETATION

During the study period of November 2020 to May 2021, we found evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a small but important number of samples obtained in the surgical and obstetric operative environment. The finding of no detectable virus inside the masks worn by the health care teams would suggest a low risk of infection for health care workers using appropriate personal protective equipment.

Association between tracheostomy timing and outcomes for older critically ill COVID-19 patients: prospective observational study in European intensive care units

BACKGROUND

Tracheostomy is performed in patients expected to require prolonged mechanical ventilation, but to date optimal timing of tracheostomy has not been established. The evidence concerning tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients is particularly scarce. We aimed to describe the relationship between early tracheostomy (≤10 days since intubation) and outcomes for patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study performed in 152 centres across 16 European countries from February to December 2020. We included patients aged ≥70 yr with confirmed COVID-19 infection admitted to an intensive care unit, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate the association between early tracheostomy and clinical outcomes including 3-month mortality, intensive care length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 1740 patients with a mean age of 74 yr. Tracheostomy was performed in 461 (26.5%) patients. The tracheostomy rate varied across countries, from 8.3% to 52.9%. Early tracheostomy was performed in 135 (29.3%) patients. There was no difference in 3-month mortality between early and late tracheostomy in either our primary analysis (hazard ratio [HR]=0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.33) or a secondary landmark analysis (HR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.57-1.06).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a wide variation across Europe in the timing of tracheostomy for critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, we found no evidence that early tracheostomy is associated with any effect on survival amongst older critically ill patients with COVID-19.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04321265.

Tracheostomy timing and clinical outcomes in ventilated COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The association of tracheostomy timing and clinical outcomes in ventilated COVID-19 patients remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of early tracheostomy compared to late tracheostomy on COVID-19 patients' outcomes.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus database, along with medRxiv, bioRxiv, and Research Square, from December 1, 2019, to August 24, 2021. Early tracheostomy was defined as a tracheostomy conducted 14 days or less after initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Late tracheostomy was any time thereafter. Duration of IMV, duration of ICU stay, and overall mortality were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) or the mean differences (MD) with 95%CIs were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a cumulative 2371 tracheostomized COVID-19 patients were included in this review. Early tracheostomy was associated with significant reductions in duration of IMV (2098 patients; MD - 9.08 days, 95% CI - 10.91 to - 7.26 days, p < 0.01) and duration of ICU stay (1224 patients; MD - 9.41 days, 95% CI - 12.36 to - 6.46 days, p < 0.01). Mortality was reported for 2343 patients and was comparable between groups (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.79-1.51, p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that, compared with late tracheostomy, early tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients was associated with shorter duration of IMV and ICU stay without modifying the mortality rate. These findings may have important implications to improve ICU availability during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration The protocol was registered at INPLASY (INPLASY202180088).

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.

Graphical abstract