BACKGROUND: The influence of tracheostomy timing on outcome after severe head injury remains controversial. METHODS: The investigation was based on data prospectively collected by the Pennsylvania Trauma Society Foundation statewide trauma registry from January 1990 until December 2005. RESULTS: 3,104 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study (GCS ≤ 8 and tracheostomy). Early Tracheostomy Group (ETG) patients, defined as tracheostomy performed during hospital days 1-7, were more likely to be functionally independent at discharge (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-1.82, P = 0.001) and have a shorter length of stay (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI, 0.20-0.28, P < 0.0001). However, Late Tracheostomy Group (LTG) patients, defined as tracheostomy performed >7 days after admission, were approximately twice as likely to be discharged alive (adjusted OR 2.12, 95% CI, 1.60-2.82, P < 0.0001). Using a Composite Outcome Scale, which combined these three measures, there was a non-significant trend toward a higher likelihood of a poor outcome in LTG patients. When this analysis was repeated using only those patients in relatively good condition on admission, LTG patients were found to be approximately 50% less likely to have a good outcome (adjusted OR 0.46, 95% CI, 0.28-0.73, P = 0.001) when compared to ETG patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate a complex relationship between tracheostomy timing and outcome, but suggest that a strategy of early tracheostomy, particularly when performed on patients with a reasonable chance of survival, results in a better overall clinical outcome than when the tracheostomy is performed in a delayed manner.
BACKGROUND: The influence of tracheostomy timing on outcome after severe head injury remains controversial. METHODS: The investigation was based on data prospectively collected by the Pennsylvania Trauma Society Foundation statewide trauma registry from January 1990 until December 2005. RESULTS: 3,104 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study (GCS ≤ 8 and tracheostomy). Early Tracheostomy Group (ETG) patients, defined as tracheostomy performed during hospital days 1-7, were more likely to be functionally independent at discharge (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-1.82, P = 0.001) and have a shorter length of stay (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI, 0.20-0.28, P < 0.0001). However, Late Tracheostomy Group (LTG) patients, defined as tracheostomy performed >7 days after admission, were approximately twice as likely to be discharged alive (adjusted OR 2.12, 95% CI, 1.60-2.82, P < 0.0001). Using a Composite Outcome Scale, which combined these three measures, there was a non-significant trend toward a higher likelihood of a poor outcome in LTG patients. When this analysis was repeated using only those patients in relatively good condition on admission, LTG patients were found to be approximately 50% less likely to have a good outcome (adjusted OR 0.46, 95% CI, 0.28-0.73, P = 0.001) when compared to ETGpatients. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate a complex relationship between tracheostomy timing and outcome, but suggest that a strategy of early tracheostomy, particularly when performed on patients with a reasonable chance of survival, results in a better overall clinical outcome than when the tracheostomy is performed in a delayed manner.
Authors: Mecker G Möller; Jason D Slaikeu; Pablo Bonelli; Alan T Davis; James E Hoogeboom; Bruce W Bonnell Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Stan A Gurkin; Manesh Parikshak; Kurt A Kralovich; H Mathilda Horst; Vikas Agarwal; Nicole Payne Journal: Am Surg Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Victoria A McCredie; Aziz S Alali; Damon C Scales; Neill K J Adhikari; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Brian H Cuthbertson; Avery B Nathens Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Stephen S Humble; Laura D Wilson; John W McKenna; Taylor C Leath; Yanna Song; Mario A Davidson; Jesse M Ehrenfeld; Oscar D Guillamondegui; Pratik P Pandharipande; Mayur B Patel Journal: Brain Inj Date: 2016-10-14 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: C Beynon; M Bernhard; T Brenner; M Dietrich; M O Fiedler; C Nusshag; M A Weigand; C J Reuß; D Michalski; C Jungk Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: C Michael Dunham; Anthony F Cutrona; Brian S Gruber; Javier E Calderon; Kenneth J Ransom; Laurie L Flowers Journal: Int J Burns Trauma Date: 2014-02-22
Authors: Ryne Jenkins; Nicholas A Morris; Bryce Haac; Richard Van Besien; Deborah M Stein; Wan-Tsu Chang; Gary Schwartzbauer; Gunjan Parikh; Neeraj Badjatia Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Hormuzdiyar H Dasenbrock; Robert F Rudy; William B Gormley; Kai U Frerichs; M Ali Aziz-Sultan; Rose Du Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Sarah Wahlster; Monisha Sharma; Frances Chu; Justin H Granstein; Nicholas J Johnson; W T Longstreth; Claire J Creutzfeldt Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2020-10-09 Impact factor: 3.210