[Tracheostomy managment and tube weaning within a framework of dysphagia intervention]. / Trachealkanülen(TK)-Management, TK-Weaning und Versorgungsaspekte in der Dysphagietherapie.

Persistent dysphagia is a major predictor of prolonged ventilation weaning and unsuccessful attempts at decannulation. Due to the high incidence of dysphagia in tracheotomized patients, tracheal cannula management and dysphagia treatment must be coordinated. A central element of tracheal cannula management in dysphagia treatment is the establishment of physiological airflow. This enables voluntary clearing functions, such as coughing and throat clearing and significantly reduces aspiration. A distinction is made between spontaneous and staged decannulation pathways with expansion of cuff unblocking times and occlusion training. Other therapeutic measures include secretion and saliva management, cough function training with improvement of strength and sensitivity, pharyngeal electrical stimulation, adaptation of tracheal tubes to optimize respiratory and swallowing function, control and treatment of airway stenosis, and standardization of processes for quality assurance.

Pharyngeal Electrical Stimulation for Treatment of Dysphagia in Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Dysphagia is common after stroke, associated with increased death and dependency, and treatment options are limited. Pharyngeal electric stimulation (PES) is a novel treatment for poststroke dysphagia that has shown promise in 3 pilot randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We randomly assigned 162 patients with a recent ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and dysphagia, defined as a penetration aspiration score (PAS) of ≥3 on video fluoroscopy, to PES or sham treatment given on 3 consecutive days. The primary outcome was swallowing safety, assessed using the PAS, at 2 weeks. Secondary outcomes included dysphagia severity, function, quality of life, and serious adverse events at 6 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: In randomized patients, the mean age was 74 years, male 58%, ischemic stroke 89%, and PAS 4.8. The mean treatment current was 14.8 (7.9) mA and duration 9.9 (1.2) minutes per session. On the basis of previous data, 45 patients (58.4%) randomized to PES seemed to receive suboptimal stimulation. The PAS at 2 weeks, adjusted for baseline, did not differ between the randomized groups: PES 3.7 (2.0) versus sham 3.6 (1.9), P=0.60. Similarly, the secondary outcomes did not differ, including clinical swallowing and functional outcome. No serious adverse device-related events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with subacute stroke and dysphagia, PES was safe but did not improve dysphagia. Undertreatment of patients receiving PES may have contributed to the neutral result. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN25681641.

Flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) for neurogenic dysphagia: training curriculum of the German Society of Neurology and the German stroke society.

BACKGROUND: Neurogenic dysphagia is one of the most frequent and prognostically relevant neurological deficits in a variety of disorders, such as stroke, parkinsonism and advanced neuromuscular diseases. Flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is now probably the most frequently used tool for objective dysphagia assessment in Germany. It allows evaluation of the efficacy and safety of swallowing, determination of appropriate feeding strategies and assessment of the efficacy of different swallowing manoeuvres. The literature furthermore indicates that FEES is a safe and well-tolerated procedure. In spite of the huge demand for qualified dysphagia diagnostics in neurology, a systematic FEES education has not yet been established. RESULTS: The structured training curriculum presented in this article aims to close this gap and intends to enforce a robust and qualified FEES service. As management of neurogenic dysphagia is not confined to neurologists, this educational programme is applicable to other clinicians and speech-language therapists with expertise in dysphagia as well. CONCLUSION: The systematic education in carrying out FEES across a variety of different professions proposed by this curriculum will help to spread this instrumental approach and to improve dysphagia management.

Diagnosis and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia - S1 guideline of the German Society of Neurology.

INTRODUCTION: Neurogenic dysphagia defines swallowing disorders caused by diseases of the central and peripheral nervous system, neuromuscular transmission, or muscles. Neurogenic dysphagia is one of the most common and at the same time most dangerous symptoms of many neurological diseases. Its most important sequelae include aspiration pneumonia, malnutrition and dehydration, and affected patients more often require long-term care and are exposed to an increased mortality. Based on a systematic pubmed research of related original papers, review articles, international guidelines and surveys about the diagnostics and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia, a consensus process was initiated, which included dysphagia experts from 27 medical societies. RECOMMENDATIONS: This guideline consists of 53 recommendations covering in its first part the whole diagnostic spectrum from the dysphagia specific medical history, initial dysphagia screening and clinical assessment, to more refined instrumental procedures, such as flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, the videofluoroscopic swallowing study and high-resolution manometry. In addition, specific clinical scenarios are captured, among others the management of patients with nasogastric and tracheotomy tubes. The second part of this guideline is dedicated to the treatment of neurogenic dysphagia. Apart from dietary interventions and behavioral swallowing treatment, interventions to improve oral hygiene, pharmacological treatment options, different modalities of neurostimulation as well as minimally invasive and surgical therapies are dealt with. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and treatment of neurogenic dysphagia is challenging and requires a joined effort of different medical professions. While the evidence supporting the implementation of dysphagia screening is rather convincing, further trials are needed to improve the quality of evidence for more refined methods of dysphagia diagnostics and, in particular, the different treatment options of neurogenic dysphagia. The present article is an abridged and translated version of the guideline recently published online ( https://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/030-111l_Neurogene-Dysphagie_2020-05.pdf ).

Pharyngeal electrical stimulation for neurogenic dysphagia following stroke, traumatic brain injury or other causes: Main results from the PHADER cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Neurogenic dysphagia is common and has no definitive treatment. We assessed whether pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES) is associated with reduced dysphagia. METHODS: The PHAryngeal electrical stimulation for treatment of neurogenic Dysphagia European Registry (PHADER) was a prospective single-arm observational cohort study. Participants were recruited with neurogenic dysphagia (comprising five groups - stroke not needing ventilation; stroke needing ventilation; ventilation acquired; traumatic brain injury; other neurological causes). PES was administered once daily for three days. The primary outcome was the validated dysphagia severity rating scale (DSRS, score best-worst 0-12) at 3 months. FINDINGS: Of 255 enrolled patients from 14 centres in Austria, Germany and UK, 10 failed screening. At baseline, mean (standard deviation) or median [interquartile range]: age 68 (14) years, male 71%, DSRS 11·4 (1·7), time from onset to treatment 32 [44] days; age, time and DSRS differed between diagnostic groups. Insertion of PES catheters was successfully inserted in 239/245 (98%) participants, and was typically easy taking 11·8 min. 9 participants withdrew before the end of treatment. DSRS improved significantly in all dysphagia groups, difference in means (95% confidence intervals, CI) from 0 to 3 months: stroke (n = 79) -6·7 (-7·8, -5·5), ventilated stroke (n = 98) -6·5 (-7·6, -5·5); ventilation acquired (n = 35) -6·6 (-8·4, -4·8); traumatic brain injury (n = 24) -4·5 (-6·6, -2·4). The results for DSRS were mirrored for instrumentally assessed penetration aspiration scale scores. DSRS improved in both supratentorial and infratentorial stroke, with no difference between them (p = 0·32). In previously ventilated participants with tracheotomy, DSRS improved more in participants who could be decannulated (n = 66) -7·5 (-8·6, -6·5) versus not decannulated (n = 33) -2·1 (-3·2, -1·0) (p<0·001). 74 serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 60 participants with pneumonia (9·2%) the most frequent SAE. INTERPRETATION: In patients with neurogenic dysphagia, PES was safe and associated with reduced measures of dysphagia and penetration/aspiration. FUNDING: Phagenesis Ltd.

Tracheal and tracheostomal hypergranulation and related stenosis in long-term cannulated patients: does the tracheostomy procedure make a difference?

OBJECTIVES: Long-term cannulated patients are at risk of developing tracheal and tracheostomal hypergranulation. This study evaluated the incidence of hypergranulation and related tracheal stenosis in long-term cannulated patients. The relation between hypergranulation, specific tracheostomy techniques, and the duration of cannulation was investigated. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted to analyze tracheostomal and tracheal hypergranulation in long-term cannulated patients. We compared complication rates in 344 postacute patients. Tracheas and tracheostomas were inspected visually and endoscopically at admission and at regular tube changes every 2 weeks until decannulation or discharge. RESULTS: Hypergranulation appeared 3 times as often in the tracheostoma (n=338) as in the trachea (n = 109). There was no influence of the tracheostomy procedure on the frequency (p = 0.931), location (tracheostoma, p = 0.947; trachea, p = 0.918), or severity (stenoses grade I, p = 0.910; grade II, p = 0.649; grade III, p = 0.304) of the hypergranulation. The main factors to account for hypergranulation were the duration of cannulation (p < 0.001) and age (p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: There was no influence of tracheostomy techniques on hypergranulation. Its development depends on the duration of cannulation. It is recommended to keep the duration of cannulation as short as possible with respect to the underlying neurologic impairment.

Safety and clinical impact of FEES - results of the FEES-registry.

BACKGROUND: At present, the flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is one of the most commonly used methods for the objective assessment of swallowing. This multicenter trial prospectively collected data on the safety of FEES and also assessed the impact of this procedure on clinical dysphagia management. METHODS: Patients were recruited in 23 hospitals in Germany and Switzerland from September 2014 to May 2017. Patient characteristics, professional affiliation of the FEES examiners (physicians or speech and language therapists), side-effects and cardiorespiratory parameters, severity of dysphagia and clinical consequences of FEES were documented. RESULTS: 2401 patients, mean age 69.8 (14.6) years, 42.3% women, were included in the FEES-registry. The most common main diagnosis was stroke (61%), followed by Parkinson's disease (6.5%). FEES was well tolerated by patients. Complications were reported in 2% of examinations, were all self-limited and resolved without sequelae and showed no correlation to the endoscopist's previous experience. In more than 50% of investigations FEES led to changes of feeding strategies, in the majority of cases an upgrade of oral diet was possible. DISCUSSION: This study confirmed that FEES, even when performed by less experienced clinicians is a safe and well tolerated procedure and significantly impacts on the patients' clinical course. Implementation of a FEES-service in different clinical settings may improve dysphagia care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03037762, registered January 31st 2017.

Occlusion of Tracheostomy Tubes Does Not Alter Pharyngeal Phase Kinematics But Reduces Penetration by Enhancing Pharyngeal Clearance: A Prospective Study in Patients With Neurogenic Dysphagia.

OBJECTIVE: Tracheostomy tubes (TT) are often needed in patients with severe neurologic injuries to protect the respiratory system from aspiration. However, TTs alter physiological oral-nasal airflow and are suspected to influence the pattern of pharyngeal swallowing. The aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of TT occlusion on pharyngeal swallowing physiology and to determine penetration-aspiration (PA) values of open versus closed TTs in neurogenic dysphagia. DESIGN: Prospective controlled clinical study with 20 tracheotomized patients after unilateral hemispheric stroke. Pharyngeal manometry and flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing were performed simultaneously to determine pharyngoesophageal pressure and timing, as well as PA scores with open and occluded TTs. In each condition, patients had to swallow 5 mL of puree 5 times. RESULTS: Pharyngoesophageal pressure amplitudes, duration, and timing of the swallows did not change as a result of the tracheostomy tube status. Penetration-aspiration values were significantly lower in the occluded tube condition (P = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Airflow and tracheostomy tube status did not influence the physiology of pharyngoesophageal swallowing in patients with neurogenic dysphagia. However, occluded TTs permitted the voluntary clearance of laryngeal residue and resulted in improved PA scores. We recommend performing dysphagia therapy in tracheotomized patients as soon as possible with uncuffed and occluded tubes.