Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation for COVID-19: a plot twist for survivors

Sonja Badovinac, Filip Popović, Goran Glodić, Denis Baričević, Dražena Srdić, Feđa Džubur, Marta Koršić, Miroslav Samaržija
ERJ Open Research 2023 9: 00478-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00478-2022
Sonja Badovinac
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Filip Popović
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Goran Glodić
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: glodic.goran@gmail.com
Denis Baričević
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dražena Srdić
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Feđa Džubur
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marta Koršić
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Miroslav Samaržija
1Clinic for Lung Diseases Jordanovac, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
2School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Tracheal complications should be suspected in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 survivors with respiratory symptoms. Treatment requires a multimodal approach of interventional bronchoscopy and surgery with tight follow-up due to a high rate of restenosis. https://bit.ly/3iw05xQ

To the Editor:

Severe COVID-19 patients require mechanical ventilation in up to 15.2% of cases [1]. Post-intubation tracheal stenosis (PITS), post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis (PTTS) and trachea-oesophageal fistulas are tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation. The incidence of tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation was one in 200 000 patients annually before the COVID-19 pandemic [2]. The most important risk factors for these complications include prolonged mechanical ventilation, reintubation and excessive tracheal tube cuff pressure (>30 cmH2O), all of which were common in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients [3, 4]. We experienced a significant increase in referrals to our interventional pulmonology unit at a tertiary teaching hospital for PITS and PTTS treatment after the most severe COVID-19 surges, and thus conducted this retrospective study with prospective follow-up aiming to describe this unique cohort of patients.

All patients referred to our interventional pulmonology unit for evaluation and treatment of PITS, PTTS or tracheo-oesophageal fistulas complicating mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 from March 2021 to June 2022 were included. Clinical and radiological data were collected from hospital records of both our and referring hospitals. Patients were followed up with flexible bronchoscopy at 4-week intervals with additional diagnostic imaging as indicated. Assessment of the severity and grading of stenosis was performed with computed tomography and flexible bronchoscopy. Based on the Myer–Cotton and McCaffrey classification systems and key features such as length, shape, location and cartilage involvement, stenoses were divided in two groups: simple and complex [5, 6]. After assessment, patients were treated either endoscopically or surgically. Endoscopic treatment was performed under general anaesthesia using rigid bronchoscopy. First, tissue incisions were made at 3, 9 and 12 o'clock using endobronchial electrocautery. Mechanical dilatation followed, with Rusch Wiruthan (Willy Rusch GmbH, Kernen, Germany) or CRE Pulmonary (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) dilatation catheters and rigid bronchoscopes with a diameter of 1.1 and 1.4 cm. Surgical treatment included cricotracheal or tracheotracheal resection and end-to-end anastomosis. Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) was used to tabulate data, calculate frequencies and percentages, and perform statistical analysis. The study was approved by the ethics committee of University Hospital Centre Zagreb (class 8.1-22/21-2, number 02/013 AG).

A total of 24 patients were evaluated and 21 of them were treated during the study period. The median duration of follow up was 8 months (interquartile range (IQR) 6–9 months). Patient characteristics, intensive care unit (ICU) treatment strategies and treatment data are shown in table 1. Most patients (18 out of 24, 11 out of 14 and five out of seven of total, rigid bronchoscopy and surgical patients, respectively) were referred from a single hospital, after treatment in the same ICU. The time between extubation and clinical presentation varied widely, from 5 to 110 days. The mean±sd diameter of simple PITS/PTTS was 5.6±1.5 mm. Tracheo-oesophageal fistula developed in two patients with complex PITS/PTTS. 14 (58.3%) patients had simple and 10 (41.7%) complex PITS/PTTS. Rigid bronchoscopy was used as the initial treatment in 14 patients, who mostly had simple PITS/PTTS (85.7%), while surgery was the initial approach for seven patients with mostly complex PITS/PTTS (60%). All 14 patients treated with rigid bronchoscopy achieved complete recanalisation without any procedure related complication. Despite good initial success, restenosis occurred in 93.9% patients after a median of 32 days (IQR 22.75–61.25 days), requiring a total of 32 rigid bronchoscopies, which established airway patency in 10 (71.4%) patients, while four (28.6%) patients ultimately had to be surgically treated due to severe restenosis. Three (42.8%) patients initially treated surgically needed endoscopic interventions due to post-surgery restenosis. Successful recanalisation was achieved in all of them. Aside from the high rate of restenosis, no other major complications occurred during or after rigid bronchoscopy. A total of 39 therapeutic rigid bronchoscopies and 111 diagnostic flexible bronchoscopies were performed during the study period.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Patient characteristics, intensive care unit (ICU) treatment strategies and treatment data

Our interventional pulmonology department is the Croatian national centre for rigid bronchoscopy, which admits patients with tracheal disease from the whole country. In the years preceding the pandemic (2017–2019), we treated an average of 12 PITS/PTTS patients annually. This number almost doubled after the COVID-19 pandemic, with 24 referrals during the 15-month study period. In concurrence with previous studies, we observed a disproportionate number of obese patients, with an even higher incidence of patients with diabetes mellitus (41.7% versus 17.4%) [7]. Obesity is a well described risk factor for PITS/PTTS in pre-pandemic studies and complicates the course of acute COVID-19 with a higher rate of mechanical ventilation and airway management issues among these patients [3, 8]. Diabetes could play an important role in the development of tracheal complications due to the changes in the microvasculature and impaired wound healing [3, 9, 10]. The median and maximum duration of mechanical ventilation, reintubation and tracheostomy rates were similar to other cohorts and higher than in non-COVID-19 patients [7, 8, 11]. The wide time window between extubation, clinical presentation and diagnosis was also almost identical to previous reports [7]. Interestingly, more patients in our study presented with simple stenosis than in previous reports, where complex stenosis was more common [7, 12]. Complex stenosis was significantly more common among PTTS patients.

We used the same management strategy for both simple and complex stenosis after COVID-19 as in non-COVID-19 patients. However, the treatment course of PITS/PTTS after COVID-19 was complicated with an extremely high rate of restenosis requiring a multimodal approach. Initial rigid bronchoscopy was preferred for patients with simple stenosis, while complex stenosis was treated surgically whenever possible. The reported success rate of endoscopic procedures of 40–82% depends on the length and complexity of stenosis. Surgical procedures have a success rate as high as 95% [13]. Despite the high rate of restenosis in our cohort (93.9%), we ultimately had a high treatment success rate of 71.4% among the 14 patients initially treated with rigid bronchoscopy, after an average of 2.3 endoscopic procedures per patient. We avoided stent placement as per usual institutional protocol due to potential complications, similarly to the protocol reported by Freitas et al. [12] who treated simple PITS with more than four dilatations in some cases. We observed a substantial rate of restenosis after surgery (42.8%) requiring endoscopic management of restenosis. This high failure rate could be attributed to the complexity of stenosis and impaired healing after surgery, which is most likely a consequence of chronic inflammation, low tissue quality after prolonged critical illness and patient comorbidities such as diabetes [9, 10, 14].

The most intriguing finding is that the majority of patients (18 out of 24) were referred from a single hospital, after treatment in the same ICU, from an area that experienced the most severe COVID-19 surge in Croatia. The extremely high number of patients that required ICU treatment presented unique organisational challenges. Physician and nurse shortages led to fatigue and stress that could have contributed to suboptimal ICU care. This highlights the fact that PITS and PTTS are, despite some contributing intrinsic patient characteristics, in essence, iatrogenic diseases preventable by meticulous ICU care.

In conclusion, rigid bronchoscopy was successfully used for post-COVID-19 PITS and PTTS as the primary treatment and pre- and post-surgery, which emphasises the importance of multidisciplinary management. Given the high restenosis rate and complicated treatment course, care should be given to prevent tracheal complications with maintenance of high ICU quality standards. Finally, delayed accurate diagnosis emphasises the importance of awareness of tracheal complications among mechanically ventilated COVID-19 survivors, since respiratory symptoms could be misattributed to parenchymal lung disease or neuromuscular disease in long COVID-19 syndrome.

Footnotes

  • Provenance: Submitted article, peer reviewed.

  • Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

  • Received August 1, 2022.
  • Accepted December 28, 2022.
  • Copyright ©The authors 2023
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. Huang C,
    2. Wang Y,
    3. Li X, et al.
    Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020; 395: 497–506. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Nouraei SA,
    2. Ma E,
    3. Patel A, et al.
    Estimating the population incidence of adult post-intubation laryngotracheal stenosis. Clin Otolaryngol 2007; 32: 411–412. doi:10.1111/j.1749-4486.2007.01484.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Agrawal A,
    2. Baird BJ,
    3. Madariaga MLL, et al.
    Multi-disciplinary management of patients with benign airway strictures: a review. Respir Med 2021; 187: 106582. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2021.106582
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Seegobin RD,
    2. van Hasselt GL
    . Endotracheal cuff pressure and tracheal mucosal blood flow: endoscopic study of effects of four large volume cuffs. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984; 288: 965–968. doi:10.1136/bmj.288.6422.965
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Myer CM III.,
    2. O'Connor DM,
    3. Cotton RT
    . Proposed grading system for subglottic stenosis based on endotracheal tube sizes. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1994; 103: 319–323. doi:10.1177/000348949410300410
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. McCaffrey TV
    . Classification of laryngotracheal stenosis. Laryngoscope 1992; 102: 1335–1340. doi:10.1288/00005537-199212000-00004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Stratakos G,
    2. Anagnostopoulos N,
    3. Alsaggaf R, et al.
    COVID-19 patients presenting with post-intubation upper airway complications: a parallel epidemic? J Clin Med 2022; 11: 1719. doi:10.3390/jcm11061719
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Fleuren LM,
    2. Dam TA,
    3. Tonutti M, et al.
    Predictors for extubation failure in COVID-19 patients using a machine learning approach. Crit Care 2021; 25: 448. doi:10.1186/s13054-021-03864-3
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Velnar T,
    2. Bailey T,
    3. Smrkolj V
    . The wound healing process: an overview of the cellular and molecular mechanisms. J Int Med Res 2009; 37: 1528–1542. doi:10.1177/147323000903700531
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Qian LW,
    2. Fourcaudot AB,
    3. Yamane K, et al.
    Exacerbated and prolonged inflammation impairs wound healing and increases scarring. Wound Repair Regen 2016; 24: 26–34. doi:10.1111/wrr.12381
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Piazza C,
    2. Filauro M,
    3. Dikkers FG, et al.
    Long-term intubation and high rate of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients might determine an unprecedented increase of airway stenoses: a call to action from the European Laryngological Society. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 278: 1–7. doi:10.1007/s00405-020-06112-6
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Freitas C,
    2. Martins N,
    3. Novais-Bastos H, et al.
    The role of interventional bronchoscopy in the management of post-intubation tracheal stenosis: a 20-year experience. Pulmonology 2021; 27: 296–304. doi:10.1016/j.pulmoe.2019.12.004
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Yamamoto K,
    2. Kojima F,
    3. Tomiyama K, et al.
    Meta-analysis of therapeutic procedures for acquired subglottic stenosis in adults. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 91: 1747–1753. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.02.071
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Auchincloss HG,
    2. Wright CD
    . Complications after tracheal resection and reconstruction: prevention and treatment. J Thorac Dis 2016; 8: Suppl 2, S160–S167.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 9 Issue 2 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 9 (2)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation for COVID-19: a plot twist for survivors
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation for COVID-19: a plot twist for survivors
Sonja Badovinac, Filip Popović, Goran Glodić, Denis Baričević, Dražena Srdić, Feđa Džubur, Marta Koršić, Miroslav Samaržija
ERJ Open Research Mar 2023, 9 (2) 00478-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00478-2022

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Tracheal complications of mechanical ventilation for COVID-19: a plot twist for survivors
Sonja Badovinac, Filip Popović, Goran Glodić, Denis Baričević, Dražena Srdić, Feđa Džubur, Marta Koršić, Miroslav Samaržija
ERJ Open Research Mar 2023, 9 (2) 00478-2022; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00478-2022
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Respiratory infections and tuberculosis
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • A 3D-engineered silicone stent
  • Obesity does not modify effect of CPAP on insulin resistance
  • Broadening the scope for 3D-printed airway stents
Show more Research letters

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society