ArticleCurrent neurovascular research2022
Timing of Tracheostomy in Patients with Intracerebral Haemorrhage: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.
Article in Current neurovascular research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAlthough early tracheostomy (ET) is recommended for patients with severe stroke, the optimal timing of tracheostomy for patients with intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) remains controversial. This study aimed to explore the clinical characteristics, risk factors and timing of tracheostomy in patients after tracheal intubation using a propensity-matched analysis.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective database search and assessed 267 consecutive patients who underwent endotracheal intubation (175 of whom underwent tracheostomy) and ICH between July 2017 and June 2021. A logistic regression model was applied to identify the critical factors influencing the decision for tracheostomy by comparing factors in a tracheostomy group and a nontracheostomy group. Patients were divided into an early (≤5 days) or a late (>5 days) group according to the median time of tracheostomy. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for possible confounders and investigate differences in outcomes between ET and late tracheostomy (LT).
resultsAmong the 267 enrolled patients with ICH and endotracheal intubation, 65.5% received tracheostomy during hospitalisation, and 52.6% received ET. The independent risk factors for tracheostomy included National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.179; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.028-1.351; P = 0.018), aspiration (OR: 2.171; 95% CI: 1.054-4.471; P = 0.035) and infiltrates (OR: 2.149; 95% CI: 1.088-4.242; P = 0.028). Using propensity matching, we found that ET was associated with fewer antibiotic-using days (15 vs. 18; P < 0.001) and sedativeusing days (6 vs. 8; P < 0.001), shorter intensive care unit (ICU) Length of Study (LOS) (9 vs. 12; P < 0.05) and reduced in-ICU costs (3.59 vs. 7.4; P < 0.001) and total hospital costs (8.26 vs. 11.28, respectively; P < 0.001). Muscle relaxants (31.8% vs. 60.6%) were used less frequently in patients with ET (P = 0.001). However, there were no differences between the ET and LT groups in terms of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (4 vs. 4; P = 0.932), in-general-ward costs (4.74 vs. 4.37; P = 0.052), mechanical ventilation days (6 vs. 6; P = 0.961) and hospital LOS (23 vs. 23; P = 0.735) as well as the incidences of ventilator-associated pneumonia (28.8% vs. 37.9%; P = 0.268), tracheostomyrelated complications (16.7% vs. 19.7%; P = 0.652), respiratory failure (24.2% vs. 31.8%; P = 0.333), all-cause deaths (15.2% vs. 16.7%; P = 0.812) and pneumonia (77.3% vs. 87.9%; P = 0.108).
conclusionWe recommend ET for high-risk patients with ICH. Although ET cannot reduce inhospital mortality or improve patient prognosis, it may help reduce hospital costs and ICU LOS as well as the use of antibiotics, sedatives and muscle relaxants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.