Dataset Information

Timing of tracheostomy in acute traumatic spinal cord injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with acute traumatic cervical or high thoracic level spinal cord injury (SCI) typically require mechanical ventilation (MV) during their acute admission. Placement of a tracheostomy is preferred when prolonged weaning from MV is anticipated. However, the optimal timing of tracheostomy placement in patients with acute traumatic SCI remains uncertain. We systematically reviewed the literature to determine the effects of early versus late tracheostomy or prolonged intubation in patients with acute traumatic SCI on important clinical outcomes.

Methods

Six databases were searched from their inception to January 2020. Conference abstracts from relevant proceedings and the gray literature were searched to identify additional studies. Data were obtained by two independent reviewers to ensure accuracy and completeness. The quality of observational studies was evaluated using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.

Results

Seventeen studies (2,804 patients) met selection criteria, 14 of which were published after 2009. Meta-analysis showed that early tracheostomy was not associated with decreased short-term mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-1.79; p = 0.65; n = 2,072), but was associated with a reduction in MV duration (mean difference [MD], 13.1 days; 95% CI, -6.70 to -21.11; p = 0.0002; n = 855), intensive care unit length of stay (MD, -10.20 days; 95% CI, -4.66 to -15.74; p = 0.0003; n = 855), and hospital length of stay (MD, -7.39 days; 95% CI, -3.74 to -11.03; p < 0.0001; n = 423). Early tracheostomy was also associated with a decreased incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and tracheostomy-related complications (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.98; p = 0.02; n = 2,043 and RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.84; p = 0.001; n = 812 respectively). The majority of studies ranked as good methodologic quality on the Newcastle Ottawa Scale.

Conclusion

Early tracheostomy in patients with acute traumatic SCI may reduce duration of mechanical entilation, length of intensive care unit stay, and length of hospital stay. Current studies highlight the lack of high-level evidence to guide the optimal timing of tracheostomy in acute traumatic SCI. Future research should seek to understand whether early tracheostomy improves patient comfort, decreases duration of sedation, and improves long-term outcomes.

Level of evidence

Systematic Review, level III.

SUBMITTER: Foran SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8677619 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Systematic review.To conduct a systematic review and synthesis of the literature to assess the comparative effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of early (?24 hours) versus late decompression (>24 hours) in adults with acute spinal cord injury (SCI).A systematic search was conducted of Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration Library, and Google Scholar to identify studies published through November 6, 2014. Studies published in any language, in humans, and with an abstract were considered for inclusion. Included studies were critically appraised and the overall strength of evidence was determined using methods proposed by the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group.The search yielded 449 potentially relevant citations. Sixteen additional primary studies were identified through other sources. Six studies met inclusion criteria. All but 2 studies were considered to have moderately high risk of bias. Across studies and injury levels, the impact of early surgical decompression (?24 hours) on clinically important improvement in neurological status was variable. Isolated studies reported statistically significant and clinically important improvements at 6 months (cervical injury, low strength of evidence) and following discharge from inpatient rehabilitation (all levels, very low strength of evidence) but not at other time points; another study observed a statistically significant 6 point improvement in ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) among patients with AIS B, C, or D, but not for those with AIS A (very low strength of evidence). In one study of acute central cord syndrome without instability, a clinically and statistically meaningful improvement in total motor scores was reported at 6 and 12 months in patients treated early (versus late). There were, however, no significant differences in AIS improvement between early and late surgical groups at 6- or 12-months (very low strength of evidence). One of 3 studies found a shorter length of hospital stay associated with early surgical decompression. Of 3 studies reporting on safety, no significant differences in rates of complications (including mortality, neurologic deterioration, pneumonia or pressure ulcers) were noted between early and late decompression groups.Results surrounding the efficacy of early versus late decompressive surgery, as well as the quality of evidence available, were variable depending on the level of SCI, timing of follow-up, and specific outcome considered. Existing evidence supports improved neurological recovery among cervical SCI patients undergoing early surgery; however, evidence regarding remaining SCI populations and clinical outcomes was inconsistent.

Project description:The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to address the following clinical questions: In adult patients with acute and subacute complete or incomplete traumatic SCI, (1) does the time interval between injury and commencing rehabilitation affect outcome?; (2) what is the comparative effectiveness of different rehabilitation strategies, including different intensities and durations of treatment?; (3) are there patient or injury characteristics that affect the efficacy of rehabilitation?; and (4) what is the cost-effectiveness of various rehabilitation strategies?A systematic search was conducted for literature published through March 31, 2015 that evaluated rehabilitation strategies in adults with acute or subacute traumatic SCI at any level. Studies were critically appraised individually and the overall strength of evidence was evaluated using methods proposed by the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group.The search strategy yielded 384 articles, 19 of which met our inclusion criteria. Based on our results, there was no difference between body weight-supported treadmill training and conventional rehabilitation with respect to improvements in Functional Independence Measure (FIM) Locomotor score, Lower Extremity Motor Scores, the distance walked in 6 minutes or gait velocity over 15.2 m. Functional electrical therapy resulted in slightly better FIM Motor, FIM Self-Care, and Spinal Cord Independence Measure Self-Care subscores compared with conventional occupational therapy. Comparisons using the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Hand Function Test demonstrated no differences between groups in 7 of 9 domains. There were no clinically important differences in Maximal Lean Test, Maximal Sidewards Reach Test, T-shirt Test, or the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure between unsupported sitting training and standard in-patient rehabilitation.The current evidence base for rehabilitation following acute and subacute spinal cord injury is limited. Methodological challenges have contributed to this and further research is still needed.

Project description:Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition that causes substantial morbidity and mortality and for which no treatments are available. Stem cells offer some promise in the restoration of neurological function. We used systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression to study the impact of stem cell biology and experimental design on motor and sensory outcomes following stem cell treatments in animal models of SCI. One hundred and fifty-six publications using 45 different stem cell preparations met our prespecified inclusion criteria. Only one publication used autologous stem cells. Overall, allogeneic stem cell treatment appears to improve both motor (effect size, 27.2%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 25.0%-29.4%; 312 comparisons in 5,628 animals) and sensory (effect size, 26.3%; 95% CI, 7.9%-44.7%; 23 comparisons in 473 animals) outcome. For sensory outcome, most heterogeneity between experiments was accounted for by facets of stem cell biology. Differentiation before implantation and intravenous route of delivery favoured better outcome. Stem cell implantation did not appear to improve sensory outcome in female animals and appeared to be enhanced by isoflurane anaesthesia. Biological plausibility was supported by the presence of a dose-response relationship. For motor outcome, facets of stem cell biology had little detectable effect. Instead most heterogeneity could be explained by the experimental modelling and the outcome measure used. The location of injury, method of injury induction, and presence of immunosuppression all had an impact. Reporting of measures to reduce bias was higher than has been seen in other neuroscience domains but were still suboptimal. Motor outcomes studies that did not report the blinded assessment of outcome gave inflated estimates of efficacy. Extensive recent preclinical literature suggests that stem-cell-based therapies may offer promise, however the impact of compromised internal validity and publication bias mean that efficacy is likely to be somewhat lower than reported here.

Project description:Introduction:The role for steroids in acute spinal cord injury (ASCI) remains unclear; while some studies have demonstrated the risks of steroids outweigh the benefits,a meta-analyses conducted on heterogeneous patient populations have shown significant motor improvement at short-term but not at long-term follow-up. Given the heterogeneity of the patient population in previous meta-analyses and the publication of a recent trial not included in these meta-analyses, we sought to re-assess and update the safety and short-term and long-term efficacy of steroid treatment following ASCI in a more homogeneous patient population. Materials and methods:A literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library through June 2019 for studies evaluating the utility of steroids within the first 8 h following ASCI. Neurological and safety outcomes were extracted for patients treated and not treated with steroids. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using the random-effects model. Results:Twelve studies, including five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven observational studies (OBSs), were meta-analyzed. Overall, methylprednisolone was not associated with significant short-term or long-term improvements in motor or neurological scores based on RCTs or OBSs. An increased risk of hyperglycemia was shown in both RCTs (RR: 13.7; 95% CI: 1.93, 97.4; 1 study) and OBSs (RR: 2.9; 95% CI: 1.55, 5.41; 1 study). Risk for pneumonia was increased with steroids; while this increase was not statistically significant in the RCTs (pooled RR: 1.16; 95% C.I: 0.59, 2.29; 3 studies), it reached statistical significance in the OBSs (pooled RR: 2.00; 95% C.I: 1.32, 3.02; 6 studies). There was no statistically significant increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, decubitus ulcers, surgical site infections, sepsis, atelectasis, venous thromboembolism, urinary tract infections, or mortality among steroid-treated ASCI patients compared to untreated controls in either RCTs or OBSs. Conclusions:Methylprednisolone therapy within the first 8 h following ASCI failed to show a statistically significant short-term or long-term improvement in patients' overall motor or neurological scores compared to controls who were not administered steroids. For the same comparison, there was an increased risk of pneumonia and hyperglycemia compared to controls. Routine use of methylprednisone following ASCI should be carefully considered in the context of these results.