The role of routine FIBERoptic bronchoscopy monitoring during percutaneous dilatational TRACHeostomy (FIBERTRACH): a study protocol for a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy is one of the most frequent techniques in intensive care units (ICU). Fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FB) is a safety measure when performing a percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy (PDT), but the controversy surrounding the routine use of FB as part of the procedure remains open. National surveys in some European countries showed that the use of FB is non-standardized. Retrospective studies have not shown a significant difference in complications between procedures performed with or without a bronchoscope. International guidelines have not been able to establish recommendations regarding the use of FB in PDT due to lack of evidence. DESIGN: This is a multicenter (three centers at the time of  publishing this paper) randomized controlled clinical trial to examine the safety of percutaneous tracheostomy using FB. We will include all consecutive adult patients admitted to the ICU in whom percutaneous tracheostomy for prolonged mechanical ventilation is indicated and with no exclusion criteria for using FB. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to receive blind PDT or PDT under endoscopic guidance. All procedures will be performed by experienced intensivists in PDT and FB. A Data Safety and Monitoring Board (DSMB) will monitor the trial. The primary outcome is the incidence of perioperative complications. DISCUSSION: FB is a safe technique when performing PDT although its use is not universally accepted in all ICUs as a routine practice. Should PDT be monitored routinely with endoscopic guidance? This study will assess the role of FB monitoring during PDT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04265625. Registered on February 11, 2020.

Case Report: Decompressive Craniectomy for COVID-19 Malignant Cerebral Artery Infarction. Is Surgery a Good Option?

SARS-CoV2 infection can lead to a prothrombotic state. Large vessel occlusion, as well as malignant cerebral stroke have been described in COVID-19 patients. In the following months, given the increase in COVID-19 cases, an increase in malignant cerebral SARS-CoV2 associated strokes are expected. The baseline situation of the patients as well as the risk of evolution to a serious disease due to the virus, depict a unique scenario. Decompressive craniectomy is a life-saving procedure indicated in patients who suffer a malignant cerebral stroke; however, it is unclear whether the same eligibility criteria should be used for patients with COVID-19. To our knowledge seven cases of decompressive craniectomy and malignant cerebral stroke have been described to date. We report on a 39-year-old female with no major risk factors for cerebrovascular disease, apart from oral contraception, and mild COVID-19 symptoms who suffered from left hemispheric syndrome. The patient underwent endovascular treatment with stenting and afterward decompressive craniectomy due to a worsening neurological status with unilateral unreactive mydriasis. We present the case and provide a comprehensive review of the available literature related to the surgical treatment for COVID-19 associated malignant strokes, to establish whether the same eligibility criteria for non-COVID-19 associated strokes should be used. Eight patients, including our case, were surgically managed due to malignant cerebral stroke. Seven of these patients received decompressive craniectomy, and six of them met the eligibility criteria of the current stroke guidelines. The mortality rate was 33%, similar to that described in non-COVID-19 cases. Two patients had a left middle cerebral artery (MCA) and both survived after decompressive craniectomy. Our results support that decompressive craniectomy, using the current stroke guidelines, should be considered an effective life-saving treatment for COVID-19-related malignant cerebral strokes.