Tracheostomy for COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: Multidisciplinary, Multicenter Data on Timing, Technique, and Outcomes.
Abstract
<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy
in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure.<h4>Summary background data</h4>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.<h4>Methods</h4>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.<h4>Result</h4>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].<h4>Conclusion</h4>Early,
percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical
tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.
Type
Journal articleSubject
HumansCross Infection
Pneumonia, Viral
Respiratory Insufficiency
Respiration, Artificial
Tracheostomy
Tracheotomy
Retrospective Studies
Adult
Aged
Middle Aged
United States
Female
Male
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/23581Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1097/sla.0000000000004955Publication Info
Mahmood, Kamran; Cheng, George Z; Van Nostrand, Keriann; Shojaee, Samira; Wayne, Max
T; Abbott, Matthew; ... De Cardenas, Jose (2021). Tracheostomy for COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: Multidisciplinary, Multicenter Data
on Timing, Technique, and Outcomes. Annals of surgery, 274(2). pp. 234-239. 10.1097/sla.0000000000004955. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/23581.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Cynthia Lea Green
Associate Professor of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics
Survival Analysis Longitudinal Data Analysis Logistic Regression Missing Data Clinical
Trial Methods Maximum Likelihood Methods
Kamran Mahmood
Associate Professor of Medicine
Alice Parish
Biostatistician III
Education: Master of Science in Public Health, Biostatistics- Emory University Rollins
School of Public Health. Overview: Alice collaborates with researchers and clinicians
with the Division of Gastroenterology on many observational studies using data from
EHR as well as large national databases such as HCUP, UNOS, and Medicare 5% LDS.
Additionally, Alice collaborates with the Division of Pulmonary on palliative care
RCTs and various retrospective studies.
Alphabetical list of authors with Scholars@Duke profiles.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info