US Practitioner Attitudes Toward Tracheostomy Timing, Benefits, Risks, and Techniques for Severe Stroke Patients: A National Survey and National Inpatient Sample Analysis

Association of Do-Not-Resuscitate orders and in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery

BACKGROUND

Previous studies identified pre-existing DNR orders as a predictor of mortality after surgery. We sought to evaluate mortality of patients receiving cranial neurosurgery with DNR orders placed at the time of, or within 24 h of admission.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using the California State Inpatient Database, January 2018 to December 2020. We used International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes to identify emergent hospitalizations with principal diagnosis of brain injury, including traumatic brain injury [TBI], ischemic stroke [IS], intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH], subarachnoid hemorrhage [SAH], or malignant brain tumor [mBT]. We used procedure and Diagnosis Related Group codes to identify cranial neurosurgery. Patients with DNR were one-to-one matched to non-DNR controls based on diagnosis (exact matching), age, sex, Elixhauser comorbidity index, and organ failure (coarsened matching). The primary outcome was inpatient mortality.

RESULTS

In California, 30,384 patients underwent cranial neurosurgery, 2018-2020 (n = 3,112, 10% DNR). DNR patients were older, more often female, more often White, with greater comorbidity and organ system dysfunction. There were 2,505 patients with DNR orders 1:1 matched to controls. Patients with DNR had greater inpatient mortality (56% vs. 23%, p < 0.001; Hazard Ratio 3.11, 95% CI 2.50-3.86), received tracheostomy (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% CI 0.24-0.57) and gastrostomy less (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39-0.58) compared to controls. Multivariable analysis of the unmatched cohort demonstrated similar results.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery with early or pre-existing DNR have high inpatient mortality compared to clinically similar non-DNR patients; 1 in 2 died during their hospitalization.

National Cost Estimates of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and Tracheostomy in Acute Stroke, 2008-2017

BACKGROUND

Patients with stroke receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and tracheostomy incur intense treatment and long hospitalizations. We aimed to evaluate US hospitalization costs for patients with stroke requiring IMV, tracheostomy, or no ventilation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study of US hospitalizations for acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, and subarachnoid hemorrhage receiving IMV, tracheostomy, or none using the National Inpatient Sample, 2008 to 2017. We calculated hospitalization costs using cost-to-charge ratios adjusted to 2017 US dollars for inpatients with stroke by ventilation status (no IMV, IMV alone, tracheostomy).

RESULTS

Of an estimated 5.2 million (95% CI, 5.1-5.3) acute stroke hospitalizations, 2008 to 2017; 9.4% received IMV alone and 1.4% received tracheostomy. Length of stay for patients without IMV was shorter (median, 4 days; interquartile range [IQR], 2-6) compared with IMV alone (median, 6 days; [IQR, 2-13]), and tracheostomy (median, 25 days; [IQR, 18-36]; P<0.001). Mortality for patients without IMV was 3.2% compared with 51.2% for IMV alone and 9.8% for tracheostomy (P<0.001). Median hospitalization costs for patients without IMV was $9503 (IQR, $6544-$14 963), compared with $23 774 (IQR, $10 900-$47 735) for IMV alone and $95 380 (IQR, $63 921-$144 019) for tracheostomy. Tracheostomy placement in ≤7 days had lower costs compared with placement in >7 days (median, $71 470 [IQR, $47 863-$108 250] versus $102 979 [IQR, $69 563-$152 543]; P<0.001). Each day awaiting tracheostomy was associated with a 2.9% cost increase (95% CI, 2.6%-3.1%). US hospitalization costs for patients with acute stroke were $8.7 billion/y (95% CI, $8.5-$8.9 billion). For IMV alone, costs were $1.8 billion/y (95% CI, $1.7-$1.9 billion) and for tracheostomy $824 million/y (95% CI, $789.7-$858.3 million).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with acute stroke who undergo tracheostomy account for 1.4% of stroke admissions and 9.5% of US stroke hospitalization costs. Future research should focus on the added value to society and patients of IMV and tracheostomy, in particular after 7 days for the latter procedure given the increased costs incurred and poor outcomes in stroke.

Effect of Early vs Standard Approach to Tracheostomy on Functional Outcome at 6 Months Among Patients With Severe Stroke Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: The SETPOINT2 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Many patients with severe stroke have impaired airway protective reflexes, resulting in prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether early vs standard tracheostomy improved functional outcome among patients with stroke receiving mechanical ventilation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this randomized clinical trial, 382 patients with severe acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke receiving invasive ventilation were randomly assigned (1:1) to early tracheostomy (≤5 days of intubation) or ongoing ventilator weaning with standard tracheostomy if needed from day 10. Patients were randomized between July 28, 2015, and January 24, 2020, at 26 US and German neurocritical care centers. The final date of follow-up was August 9, 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were assigned to an early tracheostomy strategy (n = 188) or to a standard tracheostomy (control group) strategy (n = 194).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was functional outcome at 6 months, based on the modified Rankin Scale score (range, 0 [best] to 6 [worst]) dichotomized to a score of 0 (no disability) to 4 (moderately severe disability) vs 5 (severe disability) or 6 (death).

RESULTS

Among 382 patients randomized (median age, 59 years; 49.8% women), 366 (95.8%) completed the trial with available follow-up data on the primary outcome (177 patients [94.1%] in the early group; 189 patients [97.4%] in the standard group). A tracheostomy (predominantly percutaneously) was performed in 95.2% of the early tracheostomy group in a median of 4 days after intubation (IQR, 3-4 days) and in 67% of the control group in a median of 11 days after intubation (IQR, 10-12 days). The proportion without severe disability (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-4) at 6 months was not significantly different in the early tracheostomy vs the control group (43.5% vs 47.1%; difference, -3.6% [95% CI, -14.3% to 7.2%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.60-1.42]; P = .73). Of the serious adverse events, 5.0% (6 of 121 reported events) in the early tracheostomy group vs 3.4% (4 of 118 reported events) were related to tracheostomy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with severe stroke receiving mechanical ventilation, a strategy of early tracheostomy, compared with a standard approach to tracheostomy, did not significantly improve the rate of survival without severe disability at 6 months. However, the wide confidence intervals around the effect estimate may include a clinically important difference, so a clinically relevant benefit or harm from a strategy of early tracheostomy cannot be excluded.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02377167.

End-of-Life Care Decision-Making in Stroke

Stroke is one of the leading causes of death and long-term disability in the United States. Though advances in interventions have improved patient survival after stroke, prognostication of long-term functional outcomes remains challenging, thereby complicating discussions of treatment goals. Stroke patients who require intensive care unit care often do not have the capacity themselves to participate in decision making processes, a fact that further complicates potential end-of-life care discussions after the immediate post-stroke period. Establishing clear, consistent communication with surrogates through shared decision-making represents best practice, as these surrogates face decisions regarding artificial nutrition, tracheostomy, code status changes, and withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining therapies. Throughout decision-making, clinicians must be aware of a myriad of factors affecting both provider recommendations and surrogate concerns, such as cognitive biases. While decision aids have the potential to better frame these conversations within intensive care units, aids specific to goals-of-care decisions for stroke patients are currently lacking. This mini review highlights the difficulties in decision-making for critically ill ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage patients, beginning with limitations in current validated clinical scales and clinician subjectivity in prognostication. We outline processes for identifying patient preferences when possible and make recommendations for collaborating closely with surrogate decision-makers on end-of-life care decisions.