Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Tsonas AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8450072 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Tracheostomy 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. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:All California hospital discharges from 2012 to 2013 with follow-up through 2014. PATIENTS:Nonsurgical patients who received a tracheostomy for acute respiratory failure. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Our 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). CONCLUSIONS:Long-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:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure.Summary background dataTracheostomy 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.MethodsIt 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.ResultTracheotomy 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].ConclusionEarly, percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundTracheostomy 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsForty-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.ConclusionsTracheostomy 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.