Surgical strategy and optimal timing of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: Early experiences in Japan

Indications and Recommendations for Tracheostomy in Trauma Population With COVID-19 Infection: A Review of the Literature

This review explores the current body of evidence pertaining to tracheostomy placement in COVID-19 seropositive patients and summarizes the research by tracheostomy indications, timing, and procedure. Literature review was performed in accordance with the 2020 PRISMA guidelines and includes 12 papers discussing protocols for adult patients seropositive for COVID-19. The studies demonstrated high mortality rates after tracheostomy, especially in geriatric patients, and suggested a multifactorial determination of whether to perform a tracheostomy. There was inconclusive data regarding wait time between testing seropositive, tracheostomy, and weaning off of ventilation. COVID-19 generally reaches highest infectivity between days 9 and 10; furthermore, high early mortality rates seen in COVID-19 may confound mortality implicated by tracheostomy placement. Due to the aerosol-generating nature of tracheostomy placement, management and maintenance, techniques, equipment, and personnel should be carefully considered and altered for COVID-19 patients. With surgical tracheostomy, literature suggested decreased usage of electrocautery; with percutaneous tracheostomy, single-use bronchoscope should be used. The nonemergent exchange of tracheostomy should be done only after the patient tested negative for COVID-19. Placement of tracheostomy should only be considered in COVID-19 patients who are no longer transmissible, with rigorous attention to safety precautions. Understanding procedures for airway maintenance in a respiratory disease like COVID-19 is imperative, especially due to current shortages in ventilators and PPE. However, because of a lack of available data and its likelihood of change as more data emerges, we lack complete guidelines for tracheostomy placement in COVID-19 seropositive patients, and those existing will likely evolve with the disease.

Utility of Early Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Covid-19 Patients: A Systematic Review

COVID 19 has proven itself to be an agent of cataclysm and caused an uproar worldwide due to consistent strain on the finite resources available to tackle the situation. With the rapidly mutating viral nature, resultant disease is becoming more severe over time, causing significant numbers of critical cases needing invasive ventilatory support. Available literature dictates that tracheostomy might reduce the stress over healthcare infrastructure. Our systematic review is aimed towards understanding the influence of tracheostomy timing, over the course of the illness, by analyzing the relevant literature, thus aiding in decision making while managing critical COVID 19 patients. With predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, PubMed data was explored using search terms like 'timing', 'tracheotomy'/'tracheostomy' and 'COVID'/'COVID-19'/'SARS CoV2' and 26 articles were finalised for formal review. 26 studies (3527 patients) were systematically reviewed. 60.3% and 39.5% patients underwent percutaneous dilational tracheostomy and open surgical tracheostomy respectively. We report 7.62%, 21.3%, 56% and 46.53% as approximate estimates, of complication rate, mortality rate, rate of mechanical ventilation weaning and rate of decannulation following tracheostomy in COVID 19 patients, respectively taking into account underestimation of the data. Provided that appropriate preventive measures and safety guidelines are strictly followed, moderately early tracheostomy (between 10 and 14 days of intubation) can prove quite efficacious in management of critical COVID 19 patients. Also, early tracheostomy was associated with early weaning and decannulation, thus reducing the enormous competition for intensive care unit beds.

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.

Clinical outcomes after tracheostomy in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a single-center experience in Japan

PURPOSE

Many patients with coronavirus disease 2019 require mechanical ventilation and tracheostomy. However, the timing and indications for tracheostomy are controversial. This study assessed 11 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who underwent tracheostomy with clinical information and retrospective analyses.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective observational study was performed on patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who underwent tracheostomy between 2020 and 2021.

RESULTS

Failure to wean was the most common indication for tracheostomy, followed by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation and the need for secretion management. After tracheostomy, six patients (54.5%) were liberated from the ventilator. The time from intubation to tracheostomy (21.1 ± 9.14 days) was correlated with the duration of ventilator dependency (36.83 ± 20.45 days, r² = 0.792, p = 0.018). The mean Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was significantly lower in the ventilator-liberated group (23 ± 2.77) than in the non-ventilator-liberated group (31 ± 6.13, p = 0.0292). Furthermore, patients with Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores of < 27 points achieved ventilator liberation and a long-term survival (p = 0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the outcomes of a cohort of patients who underwent tracheostomy after intubation for coronavirus disease 2019. The Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II score predicted whether or not the patient could achieve ventilator liberation.

Post-intubation laryngeal injury after COVID-19 treatment causing dyspnea: A report of six cases

Severe cases of COVID-19 often require orotracheal intubation (OTI) and mechanical ventilation, and post-intubation laryngeal injury (PI-LI) is one of the important complications of OTI. Some studies have claimed that the frequency of PI-LI may be higher in COVID-19 patients as compared with that in non-COVID-19 patients, because of the larger size of endotracheal tube used, the longer OTI time, use of prone positioning of the patients, etc. Herein, we describe six cases of PI-LI who presented with dyspnea after recovering from COVID-19. Five of the patients were male and the median OTI period was 9 days. All the patients showed abnormal endoscopic findings, including posterior glottic synechiae/stenosis or subglottic/posterior glottic granulomas. Four patients required surgical intervention, including tracheostomy, laryngomicrosurgery, or laterofixation of the vocal cord. Many post-COVID-19 patients experience persistent symptoms (post-COVID-19 syndrome), including dyspnea. Two of our patients with dyspnea had been treated by internists as cases of post-COVID-19 syndrome. Therefore, we wish to underscore the need for every healthcare professional to be aware of the possibility of PI-LI after OTI, especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Otolaryngologists should undertake endoscopic assessment of the larynx in patients presenting with dyspnea after recovering from COVID-19.

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.

Characteristics, complications, and a comparison between early and late tracheostomy: A retrospective observational study on tracheostomy in patients with COVID‐19‐related acute respiratory distress syndrome

Background and Aims

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread worldwide in 2020, the number of patients requiring intensive care and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) has increased rapidly. During the pandemic, early recommendations suggested that tracheostomy should be postponed, as the potential benefits were not certain to exceed the risk of viral transmission to healthcare workers. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome, in terms of patient and clinical characteristics, outcomes, and complications, by comparing between early and late tracheostomy.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective observational study was conducted in Jönköping County, Sweden. Between 14 March 2020 and 13 March 2021, 117 patients were included. All patients ≥18 years of age with confirmed COVID-19, who underwent tracheostomy were divided into two groups based on the timing of the procedure (≤/>7 days). Outcomes including the time on IMV, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, and mortality 30 days after ICU admission, as well as complications due to tracheostomy were compared between the groups.

Results

Early tracheostomy (<7 days, n = 56) was associated with a shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation (7 [12], p = 0.001) as well as a shorter median ICU stay (8 [14], p = 0.001). The most frequent complication of tracheostomy was minor bleeding. With the exception of a higher rate of obesity in the group receiving late tracheostomy, the patient characteristics were similar between the groups.

Conclusion

This study showed that early tracheostomy was safe and associated with a shorter time on IMV as well as a shorter ICU length of stay, implicating possible clinical benefits in critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, it is necessary to verify these findings in a randomized controlled trial.

Timing of tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients

According to the World Health Organization as of September 16, 2021, there have been over 226 million documented cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has resulted in more than 4.6 million deaths and approximately 14% develop a more severe disease that requires respiratory assistance such as intubation. Early tracheostomy is recommended for patients that are expected to be on prolonged mechanical ventilation; however, supporting data has not yet been provided for early tracheostomies in COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to explore established guidelines for performing tracheostomies in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Factors considered were patient outcomes such as mortality, ventilator-associated pneumonia, intensive care unit length of stay, complications associated with procedures, and risks to healthcare providers that performed tracheostomies. Various observational studies, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews were collected through a PubMed Database search. Additional sources were found through Google. The search was refined to publications in English and between the years of 2003 and 2021. The keywords used were “Coronavirus” and/or “guidelines'' and/or “tracheostomy” and/or “intensive care”. Twenty-three studies were retained. Due to the complex presentation of the respiratory virus COVID-19, previously established guidelines for tracheostomies had to be reevaluated to determine if these guidelines were still applicable to these critically ill ventilated patients. More specifically, medical guidelines state benefits to early tracheostomies in critically ill ventilated non-COVID-19 patients. However, after having conducted this review, the assumptions about the benefits of early tracheostomies in critically ill ventilated patients may not be appropriate for COVID-19 patients.

Tips and Pearls for Tracheostomy during the Covid-19 Pandemic

The number of critically-ill coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) patients requiring mechanical ventilation is on the rise. Most guidelines suggest keeping the patient intubated and delay elective tracheostomy. Although the current literature does not support early tracheostomy, the number of patients undergoing it is increasing. During the pandemic, it is important that surgeons and anesthesiologists know the different aspects of tracheostomy in terms of indication, procedure, tube care and complications. A literature search was performed to identify different guidelines and available evidence on tracheostomy in Covid-19 patients. The purpose of the present article is to generate an essential scientific evidence for life-saving tracheostomy procedures.

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

Importance

Approximately 5% to 15% of patients with COVID-19 require invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and, at times, tracheostomy. Details regarding the safety and use of tracheostomy in treating COVID-19 continue to evolve.

Objective

To evaluate the association of tracheostomy with COVID-19 patient outcomes and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission among health care professionals (HCPs).

Data Sources

EMBASE (Ovid), Medline (Ovid), and Web of Science from January 1, 2020, to March 4, 2021.

Study Selection

English-language studies investigating patients with COVID-19 who were receiving IMV and undergoing tracheostomy. Observational and randomized clinical trials were eligible (no randomized clinical trials were found in the search). All screening was performed by 2 reviewers (P.S. and M.L.). Overall, 156 studies underwent full-text review.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

We performed data extraction in accordance with Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We used a random-effects model, and ROBINS-I was used for the risk-of-bias analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

SARS-CoV-2 transmission between HCPs and levels of personal protective equipment, in addition to complications, time to decannulation, ventilation weaning, and intensive care unit (ICU) discharge in patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy.

Results

Of the 156 studies that underwent full-text review, only 69 were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 14 of these 69 studies (20.3%) were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 4669 patients were included in the 69 studies, and the mean (range) patient age across studies was 60.7 (49.1-68.8) years (43 studies [62.3%] with 1856 patients). We found that in all studies, 1854 patients (73.8%) were men and 658 (26.2%) were women. We found that 28 studies (40.6%) investigated either surgical tracheostomy or percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. Overall, 3 of 58 studies (5.17%) identified a small subset of HCPs who developed COVID-19 that was associated with tracheostomy. Studies did not consistently report the number of HCPs involved in tracheostomy. Among the patients, early tracheostomy was associated with faster ICU discharge (mean difference, 6.17 days; 95% CI, -11.30 to -1.30), but no change in IMV weaning (mean difference, -2.99 days; 95% CI, -8.32 to 2.33) or decannulation (mean difference, -3.12 days; 95% CI, -7.35 to 1.12). There was no association between mortality or perioperative complications and type of tracheostomy. A risk-of-bias evaluation that used ROBINS-I demonstrated notable bias in the confounder and patient selection domains because of a lack of randomization and cohort matching. There was notable heterogeneity in study reporting.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that enhanced personal protective equipment is associated with low rates of SARS-CoV-2 transmission during tracheostomy. Early tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 may reduce ICU stay, but this finding is limited by the observational nature of the included studies.

Usefulness of Respiratory Mechanics and Laboratory Parameter Trends as Markers of Early Treatment Success in Mechanically Ventilated Severe Coronavirus Disease: A Single-Center Pilot Study

Whether a patient with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) will be successfully liberated from mechanical ventilation (MV) early is important in the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to characterize the time course of parameters and outcomes of severe COVID-19 in relation to the timing of liberation from MV. This retrospective, single-center, observational study was performed using data from mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between 1 March 2020 and 15 December 2020. Early liberation from ventilation (EL group) was defined as successful extubation within 10 days of MV. The trends of respiratory mechanics and laboratory data were visualized and compared between the EL and prolonged MV (PMV) groups using smoothing spline and linear mixed effect models. Of 52 admitted patients, 31 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients were included (EL group, 20 (69%); PMV group, 11 (31%)). The patients’ median age was 71 years. While in-hospital mortality was low (6%), activities of daily living (ADL) at the time of hospital discharge were significantly impaired in the PMV group compared to the EL group (mean Barthel index (range): 30 (7.5–95) versus 2.5 (0–22.5), p = 0.048). The trends in respiratory compliance were different between patients in the EL and PMV groups. An increasing trend in the ventilatory ratio during MV until approximately 2 weeks was observed in both groups. The interaction between daily change and earlier liberation was significant in the trajectory of the thrombin–antithrombin complex, antithrombin 3, fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, lymphocyte, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) values. The indicator of physiological dead space increases during MV. The trajectory of markers of the hypercoagulation status, inflammation, and PEEP were significantly different depending on the timing of liberation from MV. These findings may provide insight into the pathophysiology of COVID-19 during treatment in the critical care setting.