Evaluation of Early Postoperative Complications Following Tracheotomy

Is There an Over-Indication for Elective Tracheostomy in Patients With Oral Cavity Cancer?

OBJECTIVES

Temporary tracheostomies (TT) are often used in oral oncologic surgery to secure the postoperative airway. Our primary objective was to determine if there was an over-indication for elective tracheostomy in our population. If so, our secondary objective was to ascertain which patients could have possibly avoided TT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients with oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma in which resection with curative intent and TT were performed. Variables collected included demographics, comorbidities, and complications. Additionally, we retrospectively applied the Cameron and TRACHY tracheostomy scoring systems to evaluate overall tracheostomy recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 116 elective tracheostomies were performed between January 2019 and December 2020. According to the Cameron and TRACHY scoring systems, recommendations for tracheostomy coincided in only 54.3% and 45.7%, respectively. Tumor anatomy and type of reconstruction were associated with less time until decannulation. Additionally, in patients without TT recommendation determined by both scores with tumor anatomy and location, as well as T and N stages were also associated with less time until decannulation.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be an over-indication for elective tracheostomy in our patients with oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancer. The patients that could have potentially avoided elective TT were those with lateral anatomy, without flap or with fasciocutaneous flap, location in the mandibular alveolus or anterior tongue, as well as N0/N1 and T1/T2 patients.

Comparison of percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy versus open surgical technique in severe COVID-19: Complication rates, relative risks and benefits

Objective

Patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 have a high likelihood of needing prolonged intubation and may subsequently require tracheotomy. Usually, the choice of technique (percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy [PDT] versus open surgical tracheotomy [OST]) depends on the preference of surgeons and patient-related factors. In case of COVID-19, airborne spread of viral particles and limited time of apnea must be considered in the choice of the safest technique. The aim of this study is to compare the complication rates and offer an assessment of relative risks and benefits of PDT versus OST in patients with severe COVID-19.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study considering 47 consecutive patients affected by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, needing invasive mechanical ventilation and subsequent tracheostomy. This study was performed at the Intensive Care Unit of our tertiary referral center. Complication rates were analyzed.

Results

Seventeen patients underwent PDT and 30 patients were submitted to OST. Twenty-six patients (55.3%) had post-operative complications (local infection, hemorrhage, subcutaneous emphysema) with no significant difference between PDT and OST.

Conclusion

PDT and OST are characterized by similar postoperative complication rates in severe COVID-19 patients. These findings suggest that OST might be preferred if expert ENT surgeons are available, as PDT could result in longer apnea and exposure to generated aerosol. However, authors recommend considering either OST or PDT at the discretion of the medical staff involved, according to the personal experience of the operators performing the procedure.

The Safety of Open Surgical Tracheotomy Performed by Otorhinolaryngology Residents

Objective:

We aimed to clarify the safety of open surgical tracheotomy performed by supervised residents, and the impact of “reason for hospitalization” on complication rates in open surgical tracheotomy technique.

Methods:

In this retrospective cohort study, the medical files and documents of 277 patients who underwent open surgical tracheotomy (OST) over a period of 12 years from October 2005 to July 2017 were analyzed. Forty four patients were excluded due to emergent tracheotomy and presence of malignancy. Remaining 223 cases were divided into two groups as “OSTs done by supervised residents” and “OSTs done by attending surgeons”. Age, gender, reason for hospitalization, observation time and complications were noted. The overall minor and major complication rates and each complication rate were compared with regard to the operating surgeons.

Results:

No statistically significant difference between two groups was demonstrated in terms of observation time (p=0.127). Minor complication rate for residents and attending surgeons was 14.7% and 17.5%, whereas major complication rate was 6.3% and 5.0%, respectively. No significant difference was found between two groups both in terms of minor (p=0.58) and major (p=0.43) complication rates. No risk of “reason for hospitalization” on minor and major complications was found (p=0.06, p=0.15).

Conclusion:

Open surgical tracheotomy performed by supervised residents is as safer as the ones performed by the attending surgeons. The study also showed that “reason for hospitalization” does not potentiate the occurrence of tracheotomy related complications.