Dataset Information

Tracheostomy for COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: Multidisciplinary, Multicenter Data on Timing, Technique, and Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure.

Summary background data

Tracheostomy has an essential role in managing COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. However, limited data are available on how tracheostomy affects COVID-19 outcomes, and uncertainty surrounding risk of infectious transmission has led to divergent recommendations and practices.

Methods

It is a multicenter, retrospective study; data were collected on all tracheostomies performed in COVID-19 patients at 7 hospitals in 5 tertiary academic medical systems from February 1, 2020 to September 4, 2020.

Result

Tracheotomy was performed in 118 patients with median time from intubation to tracheostomy of 22 days (Q1-Q3: 18-25). All tracheostomies were performed employing measures to minimize aerosol generation, 78.0% by percutaneous technique, and 95.8% at bedside in negative pressure rooms. Seventy-eight (66.1%) patients were weaned from the ventilator and 18 (15.3%) patients died from causes unrelated to tracheostomy. No major procedural complications occurred. Early tracheostomy (≤14 days) was associated with decreased ventilator days; median ventilator days (Q1-Q3) among patients weaned from the ventilator in the early, middle and late groups were 21 (21-31), 34 (26.5-42), and 37 (32-41) days, respectively with P = 0.030. Compared to surgical tracheostomy, percutaneous technique was associated with faster weaning for patients weaned off the ventilator [median (Q1-Q3): 34 (29-39) vs 39 (34-51) days, P = 0.038]; decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia (58.7% vs 80.8%, P = 0.039); and among patients who were discharged, shorter intensive care unit duration [median (Q1-Q3): 33 (27-42) vs 47 (33-64) days, P = 0.009]; and shorter hospital length of stay [median (Q1-Q3): 46 (33-59) vs 59.5 (48-80) days, P = 0.001].

Conclusion

Early, percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Mahmood K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8265239 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTracheostomy utilization has dramatically increased recently. Large gaps exist between expected and actual outcomes resulting in significant decisional conflict and regret. We determined 1-year patient outcomes and healthcare utilization following tracheostomy to aid in decision-making and resource allocation.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingAll California hospital discharges from 2012 to 2013 with follow-up through 2014.PatientsNonsurgical patients who received a tracheostomy for acute respiratory failure.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsOur primary outcome was 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality. We also determined hospitals readmissions rates and healthcare utilization in the first year following tracheostomy. We identified 8,343 tracheostomies during the study period. One-year mortality following tracheostomy was high, 46.5%. Older adults (≥ 65 yr) had significantly higher mortality compared with younger patients (< 65 yr) (54.7% vs 36.5%; p < 0.0001). Median survival for older adults was 175 days (95% CI, 150-202 d) compared with greater than 1 year for younger adults (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14-1.36). Within 1 year of tracheostomy, 60.3% of patients required hospital readmission. Older adults were more likely to be readmitted in the first year after tracheostomy compared with younger adults (66.1% vs 55.2%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.09-1.29). Total short-term acute care hospital costs (index and readmissions) in the first year after tracheostomy were high (mean, $215,369; SD, $160,874).ConclusionsLong-term outcomes following tracheostomy are extremely poor with high mortality, morbidity, and healthcare resource utilization especially among older patients. Some subsets of younger patients may have better outcomes compared with the general tracheostomy population. Short-term acute care costs were extremely high in the first year following tracheostomy. If extended to the entire U.S. population, total short-term acute care hospital costs approach $11 billion dollars per year for tracheostomy-related to acute respiratory failure. These findings may aid families and surrogates in the decision-making process.

Project description:IntroductionAppropriate care for patients with tracheostomies in hospital settings is an important issue. Each year more than 7000 patients receive tracheostomies in Australia and New Zealand alone. Many of these tracheostomy patients commence their care in the intensive care unit (ICU) and once stabilised are then transferred to a general ward. Insufficient skills and experience of staff caring for tracheostomy patients may lead to sub-optimal care and increased morbidity. The purpose of this review was to identify whether multidisciplinary tracheostomy outreach teams enable the reduction in time to decannulation and length of stay in acute and sub-acute settings, improve quality of care or decrease adverse events for patients with a tracheostomy.MethodsWe included all relevant trials published in English. We searched Medline, CINAHL, All EBM and EMBASE in June 2009. Studies were selected and appraised by two reviewers in consultation with colleagues, using inclusion, exclusion and appraisal criteria established a priori.ResultsThree studies were identified which met the study selection criteria. All were cohort studies with historical controls. All studies included adult patients with tracheostomies. One study was conducted in the UK and the other two in Australia. Risk of bias was moderate to high in all studies. All papers concluded that the introduction of multidisciplinary care reduces the average time to decannulation for tracheostomy patients discharged from the ICU. Two papers also reported that multidisciplinary care reduced the overall length of stay in hospital as well as the length of stay following ICU discharge.ConclusionsIn the papers we appraised, patients with a tracheostomy tube in situ discharged from an ICU to a general ward who received care from a dedicated multidisciplinary team as compared with standard care showed reductions in time to decannulation, length of stay and adverse events. Impacts on quality of care were not reported.These results should be interpreted with caution due to the methodological weaknesses in the historical control studies.