Suppr超能文献

COVID-19 急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者的气管切开术及随访:巴黎两中心回顾性队列研究。

Tracheostomy in COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients and follow-up: A parisian bicentric retrospective cohort.

机构信息

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Bichat Hospital, Paris, France.

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Beaujon hospital, DMU Parabol, AP-HP.Nord, Paris, France.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2021 Dec 22;16(12):e0261024. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261024. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Tracheostomy 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.

METHODS

We 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.

RESULTS

Forty-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.

CONCLUSIONS

Tracheostomy 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.

摘要

背景

气管切开术被认为是一种有助于组织医疗体系以应对因 COVID-19 导致的急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)而住院的大量患者的方法。然而,它被认为是一种特别容易导致污染的高风险手术。本文旨在提供我们在大流行期间对 COVID-19 危重症患者进行气管切开术的经验,以及其长期的局部并发症。

方法

我们对 2020 年 1 月 27 日(首例 COVID-19 入院日期)至 5 月 18 日(最后一次进行气管切开术的日期)期间在巴黎地区的两家大学医院因 COVID-19 相关 ARDS 而接受气管切开术的患者前瞻性收集的数据进行了回顾性分析。我们主要关注气管切开术的技术(经皮与手术)、时机(早期与晚期)和晚期并发症。

结果

共进行了 48 例气管切开术,其中手术与经皮技术各占一半。手术组和经皮组患者的特征无差异。气管切开术在机械通气(MV)后中位数 17 [12-22] 天进行,其中 10 例患者在“早期”组(≤第 10 天),38 例患者在“晚期”组(>第 10 天)。存活者需要 MV 的中位数时间为 32 [22-41] 天,最终脱机时中位数带管 21 [15-34] 天。早期组患者的 ICU 和住院时间更短(分别为 15 [12-19] 天与 35 [25-47] 天;p = 0.002,和 21 [16-28] 天与 54 [35-72] 天;p = 0.002),MV 时间也更短(分别为 17 [14-20] 天与 35 [27-43] 天;p<0.001)。有趣的是,经皮组患者的住院和康复中心停留时间更短(分别为 44 [34-81] 天与 92 [61-118] 天;p = 0.012,和 24 [11-38] 天与 45 [22-71] 天;p = 0.045)。30 例(67%)接受头颈部外科医生检查的患者中,17 例(57%)有单侧喉麻痹并发症(5 例)。

结论

气管切开术似乎是一种安全的手术,可以通过将工作委托给一个单独的团队来帮助 ICU 组织,通过允许更快地转移到下级单位来促进患者周转。仅遵循指南就足以防止医疗保健专业人员气溶胶化和污染的风险。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f9c1/8694414/41c95f647f34/pone.0261024.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验