Early Percutaneous Tracheostomy in Coronavirus Disease 2019: Association With Hospital Mortality and Factors Associated With Removal of Tracheostomy Tube at ICU Discharge. A Cohort Study on 121 Patients

[Prolonged weaning after long-term ventilation due to SARS-CoV-2 infection: a multicenter retrospective analysis]

Some of the patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) received invasive ventilation during inpatient care. Weaning from ventilation was difficult for some patients (so-called prolonged weaning).

PATIENTS

Patients (n=751) with prolonged weaning (reason for ventilation "pneumonia" and "acute respiratory failure") from four centers for the period 2011-23 from the "WeanNet" registry were used as a matched group.

RESULTS

The median duration of intensive medical care was 39 (25-68) days. In 19% (37/193) of patients, ECMO support was necessary for a median of 27 (18-51) days. In-hospital mortality was 8.3% (2.7% with vs. 9.6% without ECMO) and 6.8% died in the comparison group. At discharge, 84% (vs. 77% in the control group) were completely weaned and 2.6% (vs. 17.6% in the control group) of patients received non-invasive treatment. Invasive ventilation was still necessary in 7.8% (control group 15.7%). In the observation period of 6 months after discharge, 22.4% of patients required inpatient care and a further 14.1% after 12 months. The overall mortality at 12-month follow-up was 20,6% (5.6% with vs. 24.6% without ECMO).

DISCUSSION

The mortality rate of ventilated patients with COVID-19 was very low at 8.3% in the four weaning centers studied. The mortality rate of patients with ECMO treatment was only 2.7%. The mortality rate in the control group was 7.3%. The lower mortality of patients with ECMO treatment was also evident at follow-up of up to 12 months.Patients with prolonged weaning who received invasive ventilation due to COVID-19 showed comparable results in terms of successful weaning and mortality compared to a control group from the WeanNet registry. The long-term results with a survival of more than 80% for the first year after discharge were encouraging.

Multidisciplinary Simulation Training for Surgical Tracheostomy in Patients Mechanically Ventilated Secondary to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2

OBJECTIVE

A proportion of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID) and severe respiratory manifestations of disease will require admission to intensive care for intubation and ventilation. When anticipating prolonged ventilation, the patient may proceed to surgical tracheostomy to afford safe respiratory wean. As surgical tracheostomy is an aerosol-generating procedure, it poses a high risk of viral transmission and ultimately may prompt anxiety and caution in participating staff members. We aimed to mitigate these risks by providing staff with appropriate training and experience, to improve their confidence as well as practical ability.

METHODS

We developed a multidisciplinary simulation training experience and checklist in order to optimize team performance during the high-stakes procedure. We evaluated staff confidence before and after the training with questionnaires.

RESULTS

Post-simulation, surgeons were more confident with donning the high level personal protective equipment, and nurses were more confident in performing their role.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation allows the multidisciplinary team an opportunity to practice high-risk procedures and prompts the team to assess staff knowledge base, troubleshoot queries, and teach roles and responsibilities in a safe environment. In the context of COVID-19, simulation encourages staff sense of preparedness and protection for true participation during a high-risk procedure.

The impact of delayed tracheostomy on critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation: a retrospective cohort study in a chinese tertiary hospital

OBJECTIVES

The timing of tracheostomy for critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) is a topic of controversy. Our objective was to determine the most suitable timing for tracheostomy in patients undergoing MV.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

One thousand eight hundred eighty-four hospitalisations received tracheostomy from January 2011 to December 2020 in a Chinese tertiary hospital.

METHODS

Tracheostomy timing was divided into three groups: early tracheostomy (ET), intermediate tracheostomy (IMT), and late tracheostomy (LT), based on the duration from tracheal intubation to tracheostomy. We established two criteria to classify the timing of tracheostomy for data analysis: Criteria I (ET ≤ 5 days, 5 days < IMT ≤ 10 days, LT > 10 days) and Criteria II (ET ≤ 7 days, 7 days < IMT ≤ 14 days, LT > 14 days). Parameters such as length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, and duration of MV were used to evaluate outcomes. Additionally, the outcomes were categorized as good prognosis, poor prognosis, and death based on the manner of hospital discharge. Student's t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA), Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test were employed as appropriate to assess differences in demographic data and individual characteristics among the ET, IMT, and LT groups. Univariate Cox regression model and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model were utilized to determine whether delaying tracheostomy would increase the risk of death.

RESULTS

In both of two criterion, patients with delayed tracheostomies had longer hospital stays (p < 0.001), ICU stays (p < 0.001), total time receiving MV (p < 0.001), time receiving MV before tracheostomy (p < 0.001), time receiving MV after tracheostomy (p < 0.001), and sedation durations. Similar results were also found in sub-population diagnosed as trauma, neurogenic or digestive disorders. Multinomial Logistic regression identified LT was independently associated with poor prognosis, whereas ET conferred no clinical benefits compared with IMT.

CONCLUSIONS

In a mixed ICU population, delayed tracheostomy prolonged ICU and hospital stays, sedation durations, and time receiving MV. Multinomial logistic regression analysis identified delayed tracheostomies as independently correlated with worse outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100043905. Registered 05 March 2021. http://www.chictr.org.cn/listbycreater.aspx.

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.

A Novel COVID-19 Severity Score is Associated With Survival in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Dilational Tracheostomy

INTRODUCTION

Tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 is a controversial and difficult clinical decision. We hypothesized that a recently validated COVID-19 Severity Score (CSS) would be associated with survival in patients considered for tracheostomy.

METHODS

We reviewed 77 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients evaluated for decision for percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) from March to June 2020 at a public tertiary care center. Decision for PDT was based on clinical judgment of the screening surgeons. The CSS was retrospectively calculated using mean biomarker values from admission to time of PDT consult. Our primary outcome was survival to discharge, and all patient charts were reviewed through August 31, 2021. ROC curve and Youden index were used to estimate an optimal cut-point for survival.

RESULTS

The mean CSS for 42 survivors significantly differed from that of 35 nonsurvivors (CSS 52 versus 66, P = 0.003). The Youden index returned an optimal CSS of 55 (95% confidence interval 43-72), which was associated with a sensitivity of 0.8 and a specificity of 0.6. The median CSS was 40 (interquartile range 27, 49) in the lower CSS (<55) group and 72 (interquartile range 66, 93) in the high CSS (≥55 group). Eighty-seven percent of lower CSS patients underwent PDT, with 74% survival, whereas 61% of high CSS patients underwent PDT, with only 41% surviving. Patients with high CSS had 77% lower odds of survival (odds ratio = 0.2, 95% confidence interval 0.1-0.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher CSS was associated with decreased survival in patients evaluated for PDT, with a score ≥55 predictive of mortality. The novel CSS may be a useful adjunct in determining which COVID-19 patients will benefit from tracheostomy. Further prospective validation of this tool is warranted.

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.

The Use of ECMO for COVID-19: Lessons Learned

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has seen an increase in global cases of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with a concomitant increased demand for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Outcomes of patients with severe ARDS due to COVID-19 infection receiving ECMO support are evolving. The need for surge capacity, practical and ethical limitations on implementing ECMO, and the prolonged duration of ECMO support in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS has revealed limitations in organization and resource utilization. Coordination of efforts at multiple levels, from research to implementation, resulted in numerous innovations in the delivery of ECMO.

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy and its effect on outcome: A retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The exponential rise in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases has resulted in an increased number of patients requiring prolonged ventilatory support and subsequent tracheostomy. With the limited availability of literature regarding the outcomes of COVID-19 patients with tracheostomy, we attempted to study the clinical characteristics and multiple parameters affecting the outcomes in these patients.

AIM

To determine all-cause mortality following tracheostomy and its association with various risk factors in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 73 adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between 1 April, 2020 and 30 September, 2021 who underwent tracheostomy as a result of acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The data collected included demographics (age, sex), comorbidities, type of oxygen support at admission, severity of COVID-19, complications, and other parameters such as admission to tracheostomy, intubation to tracheostomy, ICU stay, hospital stay, and outcome.

RESULTS

This study included 73 adult patients with an average age of 52 ± 16.67 years, of which 52% were men. The average time for admission to tracheostomy was 18.12 ± 12.98 days while intubation to tracheostomy was 11.97 ± 9 days. The mortality rate was 71.2% and 28.8% of patients were discharged alive. The mean duration of ICU and hospital stay was 25 ± 11 days and 28.21 ± 11.60 days, respectively. Greater age, severe COVID-19, mechanical ventilation, shock and acute kidney injury were associated with poor prognosis; however, early tracheostomy in intubated patients resulted in better outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation have a poor prognosis but patients with early tracheostomy may benefit with no added risk. We recommend that the timing of tracheostomy be decided on a case-by-case basis and a well-designed randomised controlled trial should be performed to elucidate the potential benefit of early tracheostomy in such patients.

A safer and more practical tracheotomy in invasive mechanical ventilated patients with COVID-19: A quality improvement study

IMPORTANCE

The number of infections and deaths caused by the global epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) invasion is steadily increasing daily. In the early stages of outbreak, approximately 15%-20% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) inevitably developed severe and critically ill forms of the disease, especially elderly patients and those with several or serious comorbidities. These more severe forms of disease mainly manifest as dyspnea, reduced blood oxygen saturation, severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), thus requiring prolonged advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV), and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV).

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to propose a safer and more practical tracheotomy in invasive mechanical ventilated patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

This is a single center quality improvement study.

PARTICIPANTS

Tracheotomy is a necessary and important step in airway management for COVID-19 patients with prolonged endotracheal intubation, IMV, failed extubation, and ventilator dependence. Standardized third-level protection measures and bulky personal protective equipment (PPE) may hugely impede the implementation of tracheotomy, especially when determining the optimal pre-surgical positioning for COVID-19 patients with ambiguous surface position, obesity, short neck or limited neck extension, due to vision impairment, reduced tactile sensation and motility associated with PPE. Consequently, the aim of this study was to propose a safer and more practical tracheotomy, namely percutaneous dilated tracheotomy (PDT) with delayed endotracheal intubation withdrawal under the guidance of bedside ultrasonography without the conventional use of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB), which can accurately determine the optimal pre-surgical positioning, as well as avoid intraoperative damage of the posterior tracheal wall and prevent the occurrence of tracheoesophageal fistula (TEF).

Tracheostomy Practices and Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 Supported by Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An Analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry

OBJECTIVES

The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with COVID-19 has been supported by major healthcare organizations, yet the role of specific management strategies during ECMO requires further study. We sought to characterize tracheostomy practices, complications, and outcomes in ECMO-supported patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

ECMO centers contributing to the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry.

PATIENTS

Patients 16 years or older receiving venovenous ECMO for respiratory support for: 1) COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021 (through October 2021) and 2) pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia in 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We identified 7,047 patients who received ECMO support for acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19. A total of 32% of patients were recorded as having a tracheostomy procedure during ECMO, and 51% had a tracheostomy at some point during hospitalization. The frequency of tracheostomy was similar in pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, but tracheostomies were performed 3 days earlier compared with patients with COVID-19 (median 6.7 d [interquartile range [IQR], 3.0-12.0 d] vs 10.0 d [IQR, 5.0-16.5 d]; p < 0.001). More patients were mobilized with pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, but receipt of a tracheostomy during ECMO was associated with increased mobilization in both cohorts. More bleeding complications occurred in patients who received a tracheostomy, with 9% of patients with COVID-19 who received a tracheostomy reported as having surgical site bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Tracheostomies are performed in COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO at rates similar to practices in pre-COVID-19 viral pneumonia, although later during the course of ECMO. Receipt of a tracheostomy was associated with increased patient mobilization. Overall mortality was similar between those who did and did not receive a tracheostomy.

Risk of transmission of respiratory viruses during aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) revisited in the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

In many jurisdictions healthcare workers (HCWs) are using respirators for aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) performed on adult and pediatric populations with all suspect/confirmed viral respiratory infections (VRIs). This systematic review assessed the risk of VRIs to HCWs in the presence of AGMPs, the role respirators versus medical/surgical masks have on reducing that risk, and if the risk to HCWs during AGMPs differed when caring for adult or pediatric patient populations.

MAIN TEXT

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Cochrane SR, CINAHL, COVID-19 specific resources, and MedRxiv for English and French articles from database inception to September 9, 2021. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, reviewed full-text articles, selected relevant studies, abstracted data, and conducted quality assessments of all studies using the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Thirty-eight studies were included; 23 studies on COVID-19, 10 on SARS, and 5 on MERS/ influenza/other respiratory viruses. Two of the 16 studies which assessed associations found that HCWs were 1.7 to 2.5 times more likely to contract COVID-19 after exposure to AGMPs vs. not exposed to AGMPs. Eight studies reported statistically significant associations for nine specific AGMPs and transmission of SARS to HCWS. Intubation was consistently associated with an increased risk of SARS. HCWs were more likely (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.2-3.4) to contract human coronaviruses when exposed to an AGMP in one study. There were no reported associations between AGMP exposure and transmission of influenza or in a single study on MERS. There was limited evidence supporting the use of a respirator over a medical/surgical mask during an AGMP to reduce the risk of viral transmission. One study described outcomes of HCWs exposed to a pediatric patient during intubation.

CONCLUSION

Exposure to an AGMP may increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19, SARS, and human coronaviruses to HCWs, however the evidence base is heterogenous and prone to confounding, particularly related to COVID-19. There continues to be a significant research gap in the epidemiology of the risk of VRIs among HCWs during AGMPs, particularly for pediatric patients. Further evidence is needed regarding what constitutes an AGMP.

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.

Tracheostomy in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and follow-up: A parisian bicentric retrospective cohort

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.

Suspension laryngoscopy-assisted percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy: a safe method in COVID-19

Objective

COVID-19 respiratory insufficiency has augmented demand of tracheostomies in intubated patients. Herein, we analyse our experience with suspension laryngoscopy-assisted percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (SL-PDT) to assess the safety for both healthcare personnel and patients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who underwent SL-PDT in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) between March 13 and April 17, 2020 (first peak of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic).

Results

We included 28 SL-PDTs conducted in the ICU by a single operator using standard personal protective equipment (PPE) for high-risk procedures. The average procedure time was 30 minutes. Intraoperative complications were few, mild and promptly resolved. No operators were infected after the procedure.

Conclusions

SL-PDT is a safe and quick technique: it is preferable to open surgical procedures, where air-flow cessation cannot be achieved and droplet emission is high. The cost/benefit ratio is low. A disadvantage is the need for an ENT surgeon who is familiar with direct laryngoscopy, with the main difficulty being the exposure of the upper airways. Minimal air leakage and good control of occasional bleeding makes it a safe procedure for the patient and medical personnel alike.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tracheostomy outcomes in COVID-19 patients

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the entire COVID-19 Tracheostomy cohort was conducted to determine the cumulative incidence of complications, mortality, time to decannulation and ventilatory weaning. Outcomes of surgical versus percutaneous and outcomes relative to tracheostomy timing were also analysed. Studies reporting outcome data on patients with COVID-19 undergoing tracheostomy were identified and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Outcome data were analysed using a random-effects model. From 1016 unique studies, 39 articles reporting outcomes for a total of 3929 patients were included for meta-analysis. Weighted mean follow-up time was 42.03±26 days post-tracheostomy. Meta-analysis showed that 61.2% of patients were weaned from mechanical ventilation [95%CI 52.6%-69.5%], 44.2% of patients were decannulated [95%CI 33.96%-54.67%], and cumulative mortality was found to be 19.23% [95%CI 15.2%-23.6%] across the entire tracheostomy cohort. The cumulative incidence of complications was 14.24% [95%CI 9.6%-19.6%], with bleeding accounting for 52% of all complications. No difference was found in incidence of mortality (RR1.96; p=0.34), decannulation (RR1.35, p=0.27), complications (RR0.75, p=0.09) and time to decannulation (SMD 0.46, p=0.68) between percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy. Moreover, no difference was found in mortality (RR1.57, p=0.43) between early and late tracheostomy, and timing of tracheostomy did not predict time to decannulation. Ten confirmed nosocomial staff infections were reported from 1398 tracheostomies. This study provides an overview of outcomes of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients, and contributes to our understanding of tracheostomy decisions in this patient cohort.

Practice of tracheostomy in patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19 - Insights from the PRoVENT-COVID study

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.

Tracheostomy in COVID-19 Patients: Experience at a Tertiary Center in the First 11 Months of the Pandemic

This study aimed to evaluate the experience of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients in a Southern Europe tertiary hospital. Retrospective observational study in tracheostomized patients from April 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021. Data related to tracheostomy were evaluated in patients with and without COVID-19, including infections in healthcare professionals involved in patient care. Forty-two tracheostomies were performed in COVID-19 patients aged 68.4 ± 11.1 years, predominantly men (71%) and caucasians (81%). They had at least 1 comorbidity (93%), on average 3. The most frequent were heart disease (71%), age > 65 years (67%) diabetes (40%) and obesity (33%). The greater number of comorbidities was associated with the lesser probability of the patient's recovery (p = .001). Age (p = .047) and renal failure (p = .013) were associated with higher mortality. Patients were tracheostomized by prolonged endo-tracheal intubation (50%), pneumonia (33%) and extubation failure (10%). Ventilation time before the tracheostomy (22.9 ± 6.5 days) was higher than ventilation time after the tracheostomy (7.1 ± 15.1 days) (p < 0.001). No differences were found in ventilation time (p = 0.094) and tracheostomy time (p = 0.514) in the different indications. There were 3 minor complications (7.1%), 25 discharges (60%) and 11 deaths (26%). During the same period 49 tracheostomies were performed in patients without COVID-19, with a homogeneous gender and age distribution, 31% without comorbidities, with an average of 1 comorbidity per patient and higher mortality (43%). Tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients proved to be a safe procedure for both patients and healthcare professionals and improves the clinical outcome of patients with severe infection. The 21-day procedure timing seems adequate. Comorbidities played an essential role in patient´s recovery. Age and renal failure are associated with a worse vital prognosis.

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.

Tracheostomy Timing and Outcome in Severe COVID-19: The WeanTrach Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Tracheostomy can be performed safely in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, little is known about the optimal timing, effects on outcome, and complications.

METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective, observational study. This study included 153 tracheostomized COVID-19 patients from 11 intensive care units (ICUs). The primary endpoint was the median time to tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Secondary endpoints were survival rate, length of ICU stay, and post-tracheostomy complications, stratified by tracheostomy timing (early versus late) and technique (surgical versus percutaneous).

RESULTS

The median time to tracheostomy was 15 (1-64) days. There was no significant difference in survival between critically ill COVID-19 patients who received tracheostomy before versus after day 15, nor between surgical and percutaneous techniques. ICU length of stay was shorter with early compared to late tracheostomy (p < 0.001) and percutaneous compared to surgical tracheostomy (p = 0.050). The rate of lower respiratory tract infections was higher with surgical versus percutaneous technique (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, neither early nor percutaneous tracheostomy improved outcomes, but did shorten ICU stay. Infectious complications were less frequent with percutaneous than surgical tracheostomy.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19: Updated 2021 Guidelines from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization

DISCLAIMER

This is an updated guideline from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) for the role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with severe cardiopulmonary failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The great majority of COVID-19 patients (>90%) requiring ECMO have been supported using venovenous (V-V) ECMO for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). While COVID-19 ECMO run duration may be longer than in non-COVID-19 ECMO patients, published mortality appears to be similar between the two groups. However, data collection is ongoing, and there is a signal that overall mortality may be increasing. Conventional selection criteria for COVID-19-related ECMO should be used; however, when resources become more constrained during a pandemic, more stringent contraindications should be implemented. Formation of regional ECMO referral networks may facilitate communication, resource sharing, expedited patient referral, and mobile ECMO retrieval. There are no data to suggest deviation from conventional ECMO device or patient management when applying ECMO for COVID-19 patients. Rarely, children may require ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS, myocarditis, or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C); conventional selection criteria and management practices should be the standard. We strongly encourage participation in data submission to investigate the optimal use of ECMO for COVID-19.