Surgical tracheostomy in a cohort of COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: One of the main symptoms of severe infection with the new coronavirus­2 (SARS-CoV-2) is hypoxemic respiratory failure because of viral pneumonia with the need for mechanical ventilation. Prolonged mechanical ventilation may require a tracheostomy, but the increased risk for contamination is a matter of considerable debate. OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of safety and effects of surgical tracheostomy on ventilation parameters and outcome in patients with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study between March 27 and May 18, 2020, in a single-center coronavirus disease-designated ICU at a tertiary care German hospital. PATIENTS: Patients with COVID-19 were treated with open surgical tracheostomy due to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical and ventilation data were obtained from medical records in a retrospective manner. RESULTS: A total of 18 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV­2 infection and surgical tracheostomy were analyzed. The age range was 42-87 years. All patients received open tracheostomy between 2-16 days after admission. Ventilation after tracheostomy was less invasive (reduction in PEAK and positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP]) and lung compliance increased over time after tracheostomy. Also, sedative drugs could be reduced, and patients had a reduced need of norepinephrine to maintain hemodynamic stability. Six of 18 patients died. All surgical staff were equipped with N99-masks and facial shields or with powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that open surgical tracheostomy can be performed without severe complications in patients with COVID-19. Tracheostomy may reduce invasiveness of mechanical ventilation and the need for sedative drugs and norepinehprine. Recommendations for personal protective equipment (PPE) for surgical staff should be followed when PPE is available to avoid contamination of the personnel.

Angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Acute angioedema of the upper airways can be life-threatening. An important distinction is drawn between mast-cell-mediated angioedema and bradykinin-mediated angioedema; the treatment of these two entities is fundamentally different. METHODS: This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and on guidelines concerning the treatment of angioedema. The authors draw on their own clinical experience in their assessment of the literature. RESULTS: In the emergency clinical situation, the most important information comes from accompanying manifestations such as itching and urticaria and from the patient's drug history and family history. When angioedema affects the head and neck, securing the upper airways is the highest priority. Angioedema is most commonly caused by mast-cell mediators, such as histamine. This type of angioedema is sometimes accompanied by urticaria and can be effectively treated with antihistamines or glucocorticoids. In case of a severe allergic reaction or anaphylaxis, epinephrine is given intramuscularly in a dose that is adapted to the patient's weight (150 µg for body weight >10 kg, 300 µg for body weight >30 kg). Bradykinin-mediated angioedema may arise as either a hereditary or an acquired tendency. Acquired angioedema can be caused by angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and by angiotensin II receptor blockers. Bradykinin-mediated angioedema should be treated specifically with C1-esterase inhibitor concentrates or bradykinin-2 receptor antagonists. CONCLUSION: Angioedema of the upper airways requires a well-coordinated diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Steroids and antihistamines are very effective against mast-cell-mediated angioedema, but nearly useless against bradykinin-mediated angioedema. For angioedema induced by ACE inhibitors, no causally directed treatment has yet been approved.