Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32671354›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2020

Percutaneous Tracheostomy With Apnea During Coronavirus Disease 2019 Era: A Protocol and Brief Report of Cases.

Abesh Niroula, Keriann M Van Nostrand, Onkar V Khullar, Seth Force, Wissam S Jaber, Alejandro H Sardi, David M Berkowitz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Pulmonary Procedures in the COVID-19 Era.Current pulmonology reports · 2022
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Percutaneous Tracheostomy in COVID Era: Time to Adapt and Improvise.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abesh NiroulaSection of Interventional Pulmonology, Division of Pulmonary Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Keriann M Van NostrandSection of Interventional Pulmonology, Division of Pulmonary Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Onkar V KhullarDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Seth ForceDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Wissam S JaberSection of Interventional Pulmonology, Division of Pulmonary Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Alejandro H SardiSection of Interventional Pulmonology, Division of Pulmonary Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
David M BerkowitzSection of Interventional Pulmonology, Division of Pulmonary Allergy, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
Emory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess feasibility of modified protocol during percutaneous tracheostomy in coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic era.

designA retrospective review of cohort who underwent percutaneous tracheostomy with modified protocol. SETTINGS: Medical, surgical, and neurologic ICUs. SUBJECTS: Patients admitted in medical, surgical, and neurologic units with prolonged need of mechanical ventilation or inability to liberate from the ventilator.

interventionsA detailed protocol was written. Steps were defined to be performed before apnea and during apnea. A feasibility study of 28 patients was conducted. The key aerosol-generating portions of the procedure were performed with the ventilator switched to standby mode with the patient apneic. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsData including patient demographics, primary diagnosis, age, body mass index, and duration of apnea time during the tracheostomy were collected. Average ventilator standby time (apnea) during the procedure was 238 seconds (3.96 min) with range 149 seconds (2.48 min) to 340 seconds (5.66 min). Single-use (disposable) bronchoscopes (Ambu A/S [Ballerup, Denmark] or Glidescope [Verathon, Inc., Bothell, WA]) were used during all procedures except in nine. No desaturation events occurred during any procedure.

conclusionsPercutaneous tracheostomy performed with apnea protocol may help minimize aerosolization, reducing risk of exposure of coronavirus disease 2019 to staff. It can be safely performed with portable bronchoscopes to limit staff and minimize the surfaces requiring disinfection post procedure.

Indexed as

apneabedsidecoronavirus disease 2019percutaneoustracheostomy

Identifiers

PMID32671354
PMCPMC7259562
OpenAlexW3041027211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.