Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Safety of Percutaneous Dilatational Tracheotomy in Patients on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Anticoagulation

Lüsebrink, Enzo MD1,2; Stark, Konstantin MD1,2; Bertlich, Mattis MD3; Kupka, Danny MD1,2; Stremmel, Christopher MD1,2; Scherer, Clemens MD1,2; Stocker, Thomas J. MD1,2; Orban, Mathias MD1,2; Petzold, Tobias MD1,2; Kneidinger, Nikolaus MD4,5; Stemmler, Hans-Joachim MD6; Massberg, Steffen MD1,2; Orban, Martin MD1,2

doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000050
Original Clinical Report
Open

Objective: Percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy has become a routine procedure in ICUs. However, given the high and steadily growing number of patients receiving anticoagulation, dual antiplatelet therapy, or even a combination of both (also known as “triple therapy”), there are concerns about the safety of the procedure, in particular for critically ill patients with a high risk of bleeding. In this retrospective study, we investigated whether percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy in this high-risk population was associated with elevated procedural complications.

Design: Retrospective single-center study with analysis of all percutaneous dilatational tracheotomies performed in our cardiac ICU from January 2018 to May 2019.

Setting: Munich university hospital’s cardiac ICU.

Patients and Interventions: A total of 34 patients who underwent percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy according to Ciaglia technique with accompanying bronchoscopy in our cardiac ICU from January 2018 to May 2019 were included. Patients were stratified into clinically relevant risk groups based on anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy considering standard laboratory coagulation parameters, that is, activated partial thromboplastin time, international normalized ratio, and platelet count with differentiated analysis of procedure-related complications in each risk group until hospital discharge.

Measurements and Main Results: A total of 34 patients who underwent percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy were included and assigned to five clinically relevant treatment groups: IV unfractionated heparin (prophylactic dosage) (n = 4), IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage) (n = 4), aspirin and IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage) (n = 7), dual antiplatelet therapy with IV unfractionated heparin (prophylactic dosage) (n = 5), and dual antiplatelet therapy with IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage) (n = 14). Three bleedings without surgical intervention or blood transfusion were documented in the whole cohort, but no single bleeding did occur in the triple therapy group. These were exclusively caused by skin bleedings at the immediate puncture site—each of which could be easily treated with one or two single stitches. There were no severe bleeding complications or potentially life-threatening procedure-related complications. Additionally, the rate of complications in patients with elevated body mass index was not increased.

Conclusions: Bronchoscopy-guided percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy according to Ciaglia technique with careful consideration of all potential indications and contraindications may be a safe and low-complication procedure for airway management, even in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy and therapeutic anticoagulation simultaneously in our cohort with a high risk of bleeding.

1Intensive Care Unit, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

2DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

3Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

4Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik V, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

5German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik V, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

6Intensive Care Unit, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.

Drs. Lüsebrink and Stark contributed equally to this article.

The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

For information regarding this article, E-mail: martinOrban@gmail.com; martin.Orban@med.uni-muenchen.de

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

During the last 2 decades, percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy (PDT) has become a well-established procedure for mid- and long-term ventilated ICU patients (1). The main indications are upper airway obstruction, respirator weaning failure, long-term mechanical ventilation based on neurologic disorders, and securing a patent airway to maintain proper expectoration of bronchial secretion (23). PDT is considered the standard of care to prevent complications caused by long-term translaryngeal intubation like irreversible injury of the vocal cords, laryngeal mucosal erosions, laryngeal scaring and stenosis, as well as injury of the recurrent laryngeal nerve or other irreversible damage to anatomical structures of the upper respiratory tract (45).

The most common percutaneous dilatational technique first described by Ciaglia et al (6) is usually performed at the bedside (67). In this case, the access is dilated in several steps after puncture of the trachea and insertion of a Seldinger wire (Angiokard, Friedeburg, Germany) until the tracheal cannula is finally placed. Randomized trials have shown a lower occurrence rate of bleeding and infections associated with PDT in comparison to open surgical tracheotomy (8–11). In recent years, however, the ICU patient population—especially in cardiovascular ICUs—has changed in such a way that the proportion of patients receiving dual platelet inhibition or even triple therapy, that is, patients receiving both dual platelet inhibition and therapeutic anticoagulation, has increased significantly and will continue to increase in light of an aging population. Furthermore, many critically ill patients suffer from thrombocytopenia or coagulation disorders due to severity of illness, sepsis, or organ dysfunctions (12). Mallick and Bodenham (13) as well as Klotz et al (14) have recently pointed out that coagulation disorders may be a relative contraindication for PDT. Against this background, our retrospective single-center study aims to investigate to what extent PDT can still be regarded as a safe procedure for ICU patients even in the steadily growing group of patients with a high risk of bleeding and to analyze possible complications in different risk groups, also depending on supposedly relevant cofactors, such as the body mass index (BMI).

Back to Top | Article Outline

METHODS

Study Design and Patient Selection

A retrospective single-center cohort analysis was performed on all patients admitted to Munich university hospital’s cardiac ICU who underwent PDT under at least prophylactic anticoagulation between January 2018 and May 2019. The indication for PDT in all cases was an expected prolonged respirator-dependent ventilation period of 7 days and above. All data were taken from the central clinical database and detailed documentation of each patient with subsequent data anonymization. Patients were stratified into clinically relevant risk groups based on anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy considering standard laboratory coagulation parameters, that is, activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), international normalized ratio (INR), and platelet count with differentiated analysis of procedure-related complications. The study was designed, performed, and reported using approaches consistent with the recommendations of this Journal, approved by the local ethics committee and conducted in accordance with the institutional and national guidelines.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Percutaneous Dilatational Technique

All patients included in this study underwent PDT according to Ciaglia technique with accompanying bronchoscopy (67) as standard bedside procedure on our ICU. In doing so, an experienced senior ICU consultant team comprising 2 experienced interventionalists—performing at least 20 PDTs as an operator/bronchoscopy team per year—dilates the tracheal access in several steps after median puncture of the trachea below the second or third tracheal clasp under bronchoscopic visualization and insertion of a Seldinger wire (1516). Previously a Doppler ultrasound examination is used routinely to ensure that no blood vessels run under the intended puncture site. The Seldinger guidewire is used for bougienage with the dilator (Ciaglia Blue Rhino Set; Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN). Subsequently, the tracheal cannula (size, 9 mm) is inserted by an introducer and connected to the respiratory system (Fig. 1). To prevent bleeding from the puncture site, two single-head sutures are placed left and right of the tracheal cannula. Before and throughout PDT, patients are ventilated with Fio2 equals to 1.0 (biphasic positive airway pressure ventilation). Finally, a bronchoscopic position control of the tracheal cannula and a postinterventional rule out of pneumothorax by chest radiograph are performed. For anesthesia, all patients received fentanyl (20–50 µg/kg) or sufentanil (8–20 µg/kg), propofol (1.5–2.5 mg/kg), and cisatracurium as short-acting muscle relaxant (0.15 mg/kg). Anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin was stopped 4 hours before each PDT and restarted 4 hours after the procedure.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Blood Sampling and Platelet Function Testing

Whole blood for testing adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation on the Multiplate analyzer (Roche, Reinach, Switzerland) was obtained under steady-state conditions by venipuncture. Details of this method have been reported previously (16). Aggregation was quantified as units of platelet aggregation. High platelet reactivity (HPR) and low platelet reactivity (LPR) were defined according to consensus definition documents and according to the established cut-off values with HPR greater than or equal to 46 U and LPR less than or equal to 18 U on the Multiplate analyzer (Roche) (17).

Back to Top | Article Outline

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out using GraphPad Prism (version 7.0; GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA). Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, D'Agostino-Pearson omnibus test, q-q-plots, and histograms were used to test normality of data distribution. In addition to normality, also equal variance was tested. Normally distributed data were tested using analysis of variance; non-normally distributed data using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Data are presented as mean ± sd and mean difference with 95% CIs. p values less than 0.05 were considered significant.

Back to Top | Article Outline

RESULTS

Patient Baseline Characteristics

Depending on anticoagulant treatment regimens under consideration of antiplatelet therapy, a total of 34 patients were included and assigned to five clinically relevant treatment groups with a priori different risks of bleeding: IV unfractionated heparin (prophylactic dosage) (I), IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage) (II), aspirin (100 mg/d) and IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage) (III), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) including aspirin (100 mg/d), and a P2Y12 receptor antagonist, antiplatelet agent receptor inhibitor, that is, clopidogrel (75 mg/d), prasugrel (10 mg/d), or ticagrelor (90 mg bid), with IV unfractionated heparin (prophylactic dosage) (IV) and DAPT with IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage), also known as “triple therapy” (V). Detailed clinical information regarding different treatment groups can be found in Table 1.

TABLE 1.

TABLE 1.

Patients included in this study were distributed among mentioned treatment groups as follows: I (n = 4), II (n = 4), III (n = 7), IV (n = 5), and V (n = 14), accordingly 41% of them underwent PDT on triple therapy, 15% with DAPT and IV unfractionated heparin (prophylactic dosage), 20% with aspirin and IV unfractionated heparin (therapeutic dosage), and 12% with heparin in therapeutic or prophylactic dosage, respectively. The baseline characteristics of all groups are summarized in Table 1. The overall mean age was 59 ± 15.29, with 82% being male. Hemoglobin levels at the day of PDT were 9.81 ± 1.23 g/dL, platelet counts 214.09 ± 126.51 G/L, quick values 77.65% ± 19.49%, INR values 1.22 ± 0.28, and aPTT values 45.61 ± 15.31 seconds. PDT was performed 7.0 ± 2.0 days after primary intubation. The most frequent reasons for the hospital stay were cardiogenic shock, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. As expected, mean aPTT values were highest in treatment groups II, III, and V. Sufficient platelet inhibition on P2Y12 receptor inhibitors could be assured in all patients after myocardial infarction or after percutaneous coronary intervention using whole blood impedance aggregometry measured on Multiplate analyzer (Roche) as previously described (17).

Back to Top | Article Outline

Association Between Treatment Group and Complications

As shown in Table 2, the overall complication rate across all treatment groups was low. In particular, life-threatening complications and those associated with long-term patient injury did not occur during the procedure. Despite the increased risk of bleeding due to the treatment regimens included in this study, no intraprocedural bleeding was recorded. A total of three postprocedural bleeding events in group I (1), III (1), and IV (1) were mild and clinically nonrelevant bleeding in the area of the cannula incision, all of which were easily controlled with two single-head sutures on the left and right of the tracheal cannula (Fig. 1, E and F). PDT-related blood transfusions or surgical intervention were not required in any case. No single relevant bleeding was documented in the triple therapy group.

TABLE 2.

TABLE 2.

An accidental tube dislocation during PDT procedure occurred in two patients, all of which could be easily handled via bronchoscopically controlled tube repositioning without relevant oxygen desaturation. Fracture of tracheal cartilage occurred in four cases. However, the affected cartilage was twice only slightly dislocated and this was never associated with relevant airway obstruction, bleeding, or wound healing disorders. All other complications noted in Table 2, which are relevant when estimating the safety of a procedure such as PDT, did not occur at all. In particular, there were no significant differences between analyzed treatment groups. Overall, 44% of patients had an elevated BMI value (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2), and interestingly, even in patients with comparatively high BMI values, no significant increase in complications was observed (Table 3).

TABLE 3.

TABLE 3.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

The feasibility and safety of PDT in mid- and long-term ventilated patients of cardiac ICUs have not been shown in a high bleeding–risk cohort because DAPT and anticoagulation are considered as relative contraindications to PDT. Therefore, the present study analyzed procedure-related complications during and after PDT on a single cardiac ICU in 34 consecutive procedures including patients with high bleeding risk. We show here that PDT can safely be performed in this cohort with a very low-complication rate. This is a remarkable finding in light of 41% of patients undergoing PDT on triple therapy with an inherently high risk of bleeding and associated complications. Overall, no case of death was directly attributed to the PDT procedure. Interestingly, the clinical practice showed that mild bleeding in the area of the cannula incision can be easily controlled and even completely prevented with the suture technique shown in Fig. 1, E and F. For this reason, this technique may be considered to be routinely used in all PDTs.

Our study represents an important addition to the safety analyzes in current literature, which could already show that the risk of bleeding is lower with PDT compared with surgical tracheotomy (9, 15, 18, 19). There are few prior small studies evaluating the safety of PDT among patients receiving DAPT or anticoagulation (20, 21). For example, Nam et al (21) have already shown in a single-center study that PDT performed in critically ill patients taking antiplatelet agents is a feasible procedure and might be performed without additional bleeding complications, keeping in mind that only 18% of patients included in their study received antiplatelet therapy and patients receiving triple therapy were not explicitly identified. In another single-center study by Pasin et al (20), PDT was not associated with higher bleeding complications in critically ill patients treated with anticoagulant therapies. However, none of the patients included received triple therapy, although 72% of patients received anticoagulation. Our study is the first including such a high proportion of patients with DAPT and IV unfractionated heparin in therapeutic dosage, which—in such numbers—can only be found on cardiac ICUs.

Based on the present study, the use of PDT according to Ciaglia technique, if properly indicated, may be recommended as a safe method of securing the airway, even in patients with an increased risk of bleeding due to anticoagulation, DAPT, or a combination of both and resulting impairment of coagulation. Neither DAPT nor triple therapy were statistically significant risk factors for bleeding or any other complications in our study. This is all the more satisfying as PDT is associated with a number of well-documented benefits in current literature: improved patient comfort, improvement of oral hygiene and nurse care, reduced need for sedation and analgesia, spontaneous closure of the wound after decannulation and barely visible scar, shortened weaning period from the respirator, as well as overall shortened ICU stay (1, 22–24). In addition, the use of viscoelastic tests of hemostasis, for example, rotation thromboelastometry (ROTEM) analysis—which was not routinely used in our study—may even further reduce the risk of bleeding complications. For example, Durila et al (22) suggested that surgical tracheostomy can be performed without bleeding complications in case of normal thromboelastometry results, calculated by ROTEM analysis, despite increased INR. Future studies will have to show to what extent that could also be transferable to PDT. Irrespective of this, a systematic registration of possible procedural risk factors is indispensable in order to increase the awareness and readiness for optimal handling of complications and to enable further risk factor assessments.

Besides DAPT and anticoagulation, obesity has been considered as risk factor for complications, as shown in the study published by Kost et al (3). The author reported a complication rate of 15% in patients with a BMI greater than or equal to 30, compared with 8% in patients with BMI less than 30. We could not reproduce this result as we did not find a significant increase in procedural complications in patients with comparatively high BMI values in accordance with more recent studies, such as that of Rosseland et al (1). Based on our findings, PDT may be performed safely in obese patients and obesity may not be regarded as a general contraindication for PDT. However, ICU consultants, as already pointed out by Rosseland et al (1), should pay attention to the anatomical challenge caused by an increased amount of pretracheal tissue as well as to the physiologic derangements that may occur during airway management in this patient group (1).

The retrospective single-center design is a limitation of our study because findings with lack of randomization and blinding are susceptible to unmeasured covariates. Overall, we could not detect any relevant covariates, but further studies are needed to prove our results. A total of 34 patients including mainly patients with high risk of bleeding were analyzed. Due to this limited number, our study might be underpowered to prove a relation between infrequent risk factors and adverse events. In addition, it should be noted that all PDTs have been carried out by experienced interventionalists, so any learning curve effects and potential impact of operator skills were not considered in this study. Finally, for patients receiving therapeutic heparin infusions, the heparin was held for 4 hours before and 4 hours after which should substantially reduce the bleeding risk from this agent. Consequently, the risk of PDT cannot be evaluated for patients where heparin or another anticoagulant (e.g., bivalirudin) cannot be discontinued for this duration.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, based on our analysis of 34 patients including mainly patients with high risk of bleeding, we show here that bronchoscopy-guided PDT according to Ciaglia technique is a safe and low-complication procedure for airway management in cardiac ICU patients. Even in the subpopulation on triple therapy with DAPT and therapeutic anticoagulation, it can be safely performed and this condition may not be regarded as a general contraindication for PDT. Furthermore, based on our findings, PDT may also be performed safely in obese patients and obesity should not be regarded as a general contraindication for PDT. In summary, this study demonstrates that PDT may be a safe procedure in cardiac ICU patients with risk factors such as DAPT, anticoagulation, or obesity.

Back to Top | Article Outline

References

1. Rosseland LA, Laake JH, Stubhaug A. Percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy in intensive care unit patients with increased bleeding risk or obesity. A prospective analysis of 1000 procedures.Acta Anaesthesiol Scand201155835–841
2. De Leyn P, Bedert L, Delcroix M, et al.; Belgian Association of Pneumology and Belgian Association of Cardiothoracic SurgeryTracheotomy: Clinical review and guidelines.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg200732412–421
3. Kost KM. Endoscopic percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy: A prospective evaluation of 500 consecutive cases.Laryngoscope20051151–30
4. Deppe AC, Kuhn E, Scherner M, et al. Coagulation disorders do not increase the risk for bleeding during percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy.Thorac Cardiovasc Surg201361234–239
5. Rumbak MJ, Newton M, Truncale T, et al. A prospective, randomized, study comparing early percutaneous dilational tracheotomy to prolonged translaryngeal intubation (delayed tracheotomy) in critically ill medical patients.Crit Care Med2004321689–1694
6. Ciaglia P, Firsching R, Syniec C. Elective percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy. A new simple bedside procedure; preliminary report.Chest198587715–719
7. Knipping S, Schmidt A, Bartel-Friedrich S. Dilatational tracheotomy in head and neck surgery.Laryngorhinootologie20169529–36
8. Hazard P, Jones C, Benitone J. Comparative clinical trial of standard operative tracheostomy with percutaneous tracheostomy.Crit Care Med1991191018–1024
9. Holdgaard HO, Pedersen J, Jensen RH, et al. Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus conventional surgical tracheostomy. A clinical randomised study.Acta Anaesthesiol Scand199842545–550
10. Johnson-Obaseki S, Veljkovic A, Javidnia H. Complication rates of open surgical versus percutaneous tracheostomy in critically ill patients.Laryngoscope20161262459–2467
11. Hui P, Cook DJ, Lim W, et al. The frequency and clinical significance of thrombocytopenia complicating critical illness: A systematic review.Chest2011139271–278
12. Flaatten H, Gjerde S, Heimdal JH, et al. The effect of tracheostomy on outcome in intensive care unit patients.Acta Anaesthesiol Scand20065092–98
13. Mallick A, Bodenham AR. Tracheostomy in critically ill patients.Eur J Anaesthesiol201027676–682
14. Klotz R, Probst P, Deininger M, et al. Percutaneous versus surgical strategy for tracheostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative and postoperative complications.Langenbecks Arch Surg2018403137–149
15. Freeman BD, Isabella K, Lin N, et al. A meta-analysis of prospective trials comparing percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy in critically ill patients.Chest20001181412–1418
16. Gründling M, Quindel M. Perkutane Dilatationstracheotomie Techniken-Verfahren-Komplikationen.Anaesthesist200554929–944
17. Tantry US, Bonello L, Aradi D, et al.; Working Group on On-Treatment Platelet ReactivityConsensus and update on the definition of on-treatment platelet reactivity to adenosine diphosphate associated with ischemia and bleeding.J Am Coll Cardiol2013622261–2273
18. Antonelli M, Michetti V, Di Palma A, et al. Percutaneous translaryngeal versus surgical tracheostomy: A randomized trial with 1-yr double-blind follow-up.Crit Care Med2005331015–1020
19. Oggiano M, Ewig S, Hecker E. A comparison of percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy versus conventional surgical tracheostomy.Pneumologie201468322–328
20. Pasin L, Frati E, Cabrini L, et al. Percutaneous tracheostomy in patients on anticoagulants.Ann Card Anaesth201518329–334
21. Nam SJ, Park JY, Lee H, et al. Percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy in critically ill patients taking antiplatelet agents.Korean J Crit Care Med201429183–188
22. Durila M, Lukáš P, Astraverkhava M, et al. Tracheostomy in intensive care unit patients can be performed without bleeding complications in case of normal thromboelastometry results (EXTEM CT) despite increased PT-INR: A prospective pilot study.BMC Anesthesiol20151089
23. Griffiths J, Barber VS, Morgan L, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of the timing of tracheostomy in adult patients undergoing artificial ventilation.Bmj20053301243
24. Nieszkowska A, Combes A, Luyt CE, et al. Impact of tracheotomy on sedative administration, sedation level, and comfort of mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients.Crit Care Med2005332527–2533
Keywords:

airway management; anticoagulation; antiplatelet therapy; bleeding; percutaneous dilatational tracheotomy

Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.