Louise Elander, Anzal Abdirashid, Henrik Andersson, Jonna Idh, Håkan Johansson, Michelle S Chew
{"title":"Frequency and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients with tracheostomy, a retrospective two-center cohort study.","authors":"Louise Elander, Anzal Abdirashid, Henrik Andersson, Jonna Idh, Håkan Johansson, Michelle S Chew","doi":"10.1111/aas.70011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal use of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients is debated, and considerable uncertainties on the frequency, timing, and outcomes of tracheostomy remain. The objective was to study the frequency and timing of tracheostomy in a real-world population of critically ill COVID-19 patients. The secondary aim was to study whether early tracheostomy was associated with days alive and out of intensive care unit (ICU), days free of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), 60-day mortality, ventilator weaning rate, and ICU discharge rate compared to late tracheostomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study is a retrospective two-center cohort study. All COVID-19 patients admitted to critical care in the Region Östergötland County Council, Sweden, between March 2020 and September 2021 were included. Early (≤10 days from tracheal intubation) and late (>10 days) tracheostomy were compared. Through the Swedish intensive care registry, 249 mechanically ventilated COVID-19-positive patients ≥18 years old with respiratory failure were included. The pre-defined primary outcomes were the frequency and timing of tracheostomy. Secondary outcomes were days free of mechanical ventilation and intensive care, ICU discharge rate, ventilator weaning rate, and 60-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 319 identified patients (70% men), 249 (78%) underwent endotracheal intubation. Of these, 145 (58%) underwent tracheostomy and 99 (68%) were performed early. Tracheostomy patients (vs. non-tracheostomy) had fewer IMV-free days and ICU-free days (27 [0-43] vs. 52 [43-55], p < .001, and 24 [0-40] vs. 49 [41-52], p < .001). Late (vs. early) tracheostomy patients had fewer IMV- and ICU-free days (16 [0-31] vs. 36 [0-47], p < .001 and 8 [0-28] vs. 32 [0-44], p < .001). Early tracheostomy (vs. late) was associated with a significantly higher ICU discharge rate (adjusted HR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.40-0.86], p = .006), but not with the weaning rate (adjusted HR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.12-3.32], p = .5) or 60-day mortality (adjusted HR = 1.27, 95% CI [0.61-2.67], p = .5).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tracheostomy is common in critically ill COVID-19 patients. In patients predicted to need a tracheostomy at some point, early, rather than late, tracheostomy might be a means to reduce the time spent in ICU. However, we do not have sufficient evidence to suggest that early tracheostomy reduces mortality or weaning rates, compared with late tracheostomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":"69 4","pages":"e70011"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.70011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The optimal use of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients is debated, and considerable uncertainties on the frequency, timing, and outcomes of tracheostomy remain. The objective was to study the frequency and timing of tracheostomy in a real-world population of critically ill COVID-19 patients. The secondary aim was to study whether early tracheostomy was associated with days alive and out of intensive care unit (ICU), days free of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), 60-day mortality, ventilator weaning rate, and ICU discharge rate compared to late tracheostomy.
Methods: The study is a retrospective two-center cohort study. All COVID-19 patients admitted to critical care in the Region Östergötland County Council, Sweden, between March 2020 and September 2021 were included. Early (≤10 days from tracheal intubation) and late (>10 days) tracheostomy were compared. Through the Swedish intensive care registry, 249 mechanically ventilated COVID-19-positive patients ≥18 years old with respiratory failure were included. The pre-defined primary outcomes were the frequency and timing of tracheostomy. Secondary outcomes were days free of mechanical ventilation and intensive care, ICU discharge rate, ventilator weaning rate, and 60-day mortality.
Results: Of 319 identified patients (70% men), 249 (78%) underwent endotracheal intubation. Of these, 145 (58%) underwent tracheostomy and 99 (68%) were performed early. Tracheostomy patients (vs. non-tracheostomy) had fewer IMV-free days and ICU-free days (27 [0-43] vs. 52 [43-55], p < .001, and 24 [0-40] vs. 49 [41-52], p < .001). Late (vs. early) tracheostomy patients had fewer IMV- and ICU-free days (16 [0-31] vs. 36 [0-47], p < .001 and 8 [0-28] vs. 32 [0-44], p < .001). Early tracheostomy (vs. late) was associated with a significantly higher ICU discharge rate (adjusted HR = 0.59, 95% CI [0.40-0.86], p = .006), but not with the weaning rate (adjusted HR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.12-3.32], p = .5) or 60-day mortality (adjusted HR = 1.27, 95% CI [0.61-2.67], p = .5).
Conclusions: Tracheostomy is common in critically ill COVID-19 patients. In patients predicted to need a tracheostomy at some point, early, rather than late, tracheostomy might be a means to reduce the time spent in ICU. However, we do not have sufficient evidence to suggest that early tracheostomy reduces mortality or weaning rates, compared with late tracheostomy.
期刊介绍:
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.