Balakrishnan, Karthik

Objectives/HypothesisThis study defines essential data elements to be recorded during an aerodigestive “triple endoscopy” to form the foundation of a standardized multicenter registry and to clearly define measurement of each consensus item.Study DesignModified Delphi process.MethodsModified Delphi consensus with six survey rounds. Twenty‐four expert pediatric otolaryngology, pulmonology, and gastroenterology aerodigestive clinicians from eight large academic pediatric aerodigestive programs formed the Delphi panel. After achieving consensus through the Delphi process, outside validation was performed at 2019 national Aerodigestive Society conference. Consensus, near‐consensus, or exclusion was obtained for each proposed data element. Concordance was then measured between expert panel conclusions and validation group conclusions.ResultsOverall response rate was 94.4%. 73/167 proposed items reached consensus in six domains (flexible bronchoscopy, bronchoalveolar lavage, microdirect laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy with biopsies, and esophageal impedance and pH probe). Measurement of all items was defined; classification/grading systems were selected for 11 items. Validation group endorsed importance of 82/167 data items; compared to expert consensus, overall, inclusion, and exclusion concordance rates were 94.5%, 98.7%, and 90.9%.ConclusionTriple endoscopy is a central component of aerodigestive care. This study identifies and defines data elements to be recorded for all triple endoscopy procedures. The list is of usable length, and clear definitions were created for all items, with explicit classification/grading systems selected for 11 items. Face validity was confirmed with an independent multispecialty sample of aerodigestive providers. This consensus provides the foundation for a triple endoscopy registry but also is immediately applicable to standardize clinical documentation in aerodigestive care.Level of Evidence5 Laryngoscope, 132:2251–2258, 2022

Objectives/HypothesisOver the past decade, thoracic slide tracheoplasty (TST) has become the principal operation in the management of congenital tracheal stenosis. The purpose of this report was to describe our experience with revision TST following unsuccessful prior tracheal reconstruction.Study DesignRetrospective analysis at an academic children's hospital.MethodsPatients undergoing TST on cardiopulmonary bypass between January 2005 and May 2014 were reviewed. Patients with a history of prior airway surgery were extracted for further analysis. Preoperative patient variables and postoperative outcomes were evaluated and compared between patients undergoing revision slide tracheoplasty (RTST) and a control group of 26 matched patients undergoing primary surgery TST.ResultsTwenty‐six revision patients (25 referrals, one primary patient) of 162 patients reviewed over the study period met inclusion criteria. Twenty‐three patients had a history of complete tracheal rings, and three patients had cartilaginous deficiency. A total of 41 airway reconstruction procedures had been performed prior to RTST. When compared to primary TST, patients undergoing RTST required fewer cardiac procedures intraoperatively, and fewer mean ventilator hours (P = .01) postoperatively. There was no significant difference in the median length of stay, requirement of >48 hours ventilation, or postoperative complications between groups. There was one nonsurgical postoperative mortality following RTST.ConclusionsDespite some differences in the postoperative management when compared to nonrevision cases, revision TST can be successfully performed after prior tracheal reconstruction with good postoperative outcomes.Level of Evidence4. Laryngoscope, 128:2181–2186, 2018