Predictors of Successful Decannulation Using a Tracheostomy Retainer in Patients with Prolonged Weaning and Persisting Respiratory Failure

Background: For percutaneously tracheostomized patients with prolonged weaning and persisting respiratory failure, the adequate time point for safe decannulation and switch to noninvasive ventilation is an important clinical issue. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of a tracheostomy retainer (TR) and the predictors of successful decannulation. Methods: We studied 166 of 384 patients with prolonged weaning in whom a TR was inserted into a tracheostoma. Patients were analyzed with regard to successful decannulation and characterized by blood gas values, the duration of previous spontaneous breathing, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) and laboratory parameters. Results: In 47 patients (28.3%) recannulation was necessary, mostly due to respiratory decompensation and aspiration. Overall, 80.6% of the patients could be liberated from a tracheostomy with the help of a TR. The need for recannulation was associated with a shorter duration of spontaneous breathing within the last 24/48 h (p < 0.01 each), lower arterial oxygen tension (p = 0.025), greater age (p = 0.025), and a higher creatinine level (p = 0.003) and SAPS (p < 0.001). The risk for recannulation was 9.5% when patients breathed spontaneously for 19-24 h within the 24 h prior to decannulation, but 75.0% when patients breathed for only 0-6 h without ventilatory support (p < 0.001). According to ROC analysis, the SAPS best predicted successful decannulation {[}AUC 0.725 (95% CI: 0.634-0.815), p < 0.001]. Recannulated patients had longer durations of intubation (p = 0.046), tracheostomy (p = 0.003) and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In percutaneously tracheostomized patients with prolonged weaning, the use of a TR seems to facilitate and improve the weaning process considerably. The duration of spontaneous breathing prior to decannulation, age and oxygenation describe the risk for recannulation in these patients. Copyright (c) 2012 S. Karger AG, Base

Heterogeneous treatment effects of therapeutic-dose heparin in patients hospitalized for COVID-19

Importance Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of therapeutic-dose heparin in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 produced conflicting results, possibly due to heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) across individuals. Better understanding of HTE could facilitate individualized clinical decision-making. Objective To evaluate HTE of therapeutic-dose heparin for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to compare approaches to assessing HTE. Design, Setting, and Participants Exploratory analysis of a multiplatform adaptive RCT of therapeutic-dose heparin vs usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in 3320 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 enrolled in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia between April 2020 and January 2021. Heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed 3 ways: using (1) conventional subgroup analyses of baseline characteristics, (2) a multivariable outcome prediction model (risk-based approach), and (3) a multivariable causal forest model (effect-based approach). Analyses primarily used bayesian statistics, consistent with the original trial. Exposures Participants were randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Main Outcomes and Measures Organ support–free days, assigning a value of −1 to those who died in the hospital and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 for those who survived to hospital discharge; and hospital survival. Results Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between patients randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care (median age, 60 years; 38% female; 32% known non-White race; 45% Hispanic). In the overall multiplatform RCT population, therapeutic-dose heparin was not associated with an increase in organ support–free days (median value for the posterior distribution of the OR, 1.05; 95% credible interval, 0.91-1.22). In conventional subgroup analyses, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin on organ support–free days differed between patients requiring organ support at baseline or not (median OR, 0.85 vs 1.30; posterior probability of difference in OR, 99.8%), between females and males (median OR, 0.87 vs 1.16; posterior probability of difference in OR, 96.4%), and between patients with lower body mass index (BMI 90% for all comparisons). In risk-based analysis, patients at lowest risk of poor outcome had the highest propensity for benefit from heparin (lowest risk decile: posterior probability of OR >1, 92%) while those at highest risk were most likely to be harmed (highest risk decile: posterior probability of OR <1, 87%). In effect-based analysis, a subset of patients identified at high risk of harm (P = .05 for difference in treatment effect) tended to have high BMI and were more likely to require organ support at baseline. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin was heterogeneous. In all 3 approaches to assessing HTE, heparin was more likely to be beneficial in those who were less severely ill at presentation or had lower BMI and more likely to be harmful in sicker patients and those with higher BMI. The findings illustrate the importance of considering HTE in the design and analysis of RCTs. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT0437258