Clary, Matthew S

Objective To examine the impact of increased body mass index (BMI) on (1) tracheotomy timing and (2) short‐term surgical complications requiring a return to the operating room and 30‐day mortality utilizing data from the Multi‐Institutional Study on Tracheotomy (MIST). Methods A retrospective analysis of patients from the MIST database who underwent surgical or percutaneous tracheotomy between 2013 and 2016 at eight institutions was completed. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to assess the impact of obesity on tracheotomy timing and complications. Results Among the 3369 patients who underwent tracheotomy, 41.0% were obese and 21.6% were morbidly obese. BMI was associated with higher rates of prolonged intubation prior to tracheotomy accounting for comorbidities, indication for tracheotomy, institution, and type of tracheostomy ( p = 0.001). Morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 ) experienced a longer duration of intubation compared with patients with a normal BMI (median days intubated [IQR 25%–75%]: 11.0 days [7–17 days] versus 9.0 days [5–14 days]; p < 0.001) but did not have statistically higher rates of return to the operating room within 30 days ( p = 0.12) or mortality ( p = 0.90) on multivariable analysis. This same finding of prolonged intubation was not seen in overweight, nonobese patients when compared with normal BMI patients (median days intubated [IQR 25%–75%]: 10.0 days [6–15 days] versus 10.0 days [6–15 days]; p = 0.36). Conclusion BMI was associated with increased duration of intubation prior to tracheotomy. Although morbidly obese patients had a longer duration of intubation, there were no differences in return to the operating room or mortality within 30 days. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope , 134:4674–4681, 2024

Objectives/HypothesisThere are currently no established recommendations for the use of perioperative antibiotics (PAs) to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs) for direct microlaryngoscopy (DML). This study examined the incidence of SSI in patients undergoing DML with and without PAs.Study DesignRetrospective, multi‐institutional chart review.MethodsA retrospective, multi‐institutional chart review was performed at four tertiary referral academic medical centers. Patients undergoing DML from 2010 to 2017 were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Medical records of patients undergoing DML with biopsy, microsurgery, laser ablation, or vocal fold injection who had adequate follow‐up were reviewed. Procedures with significant cartilage destruction, concurrent open surgery, or esophageal surgery were excluded. Data recorded included age, gender, pacemaker history, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, wound class, indication for surgery, use of laser, complications, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, pain, fever, and postoperative steroid and antibiotic prescriptions. Presence or absence of SSIs was evaluated by a fellowship‐trained laryngologist.ResultsThere were 834 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of those, 698 did not receive PAs and 136 received PAs. The median age of patients was 54 years of age in the PA group and 57.5 years of age in the non‐PA group, and all cases were recorded as wound class II. Overall, 58% of surgeries involved use of carbon dioxide or potassium‐titanyl‐phosphate laser. Only one SSI was reported on follow‐up in a patient who did receive PAs.ConclusionsSSIs are exceedingly rare following DML. PA use is not indicated for routine DML.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, 128:2838–2843, 2018

ObjectivesCurrently, there are no cardiovascular (CV) preprocedure screening parameters for patients undergoing in‐office laryngeal procedures (IOLP). Studies have shown significant changes in CV measures for IOLP. The aim was to develop and evaluate a pre‐IOLP CV screening protocol.MethodsReview of IOLP literature and consultation with an anesthesiologist and cardiologist led to the development of CV parameters and questions related to four metabolic equivalents (METS) of work as a patient‐screening tool before IOLP. A separate cohort was screened with only a modified CV protocol. All patients were screened for heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) elevation prior to the procedure. Need for further CV evaluation was characterized as systolic blood pressure BP >160, diastolic BP >100, and/or HR >110 beats/minute. Patients whose BP/HR exceeded these values were referred to their primary care physician (PCP) before re‐screening. If parameters were exceeded again at the second screen, then the procedure was done under monitored anesthesia care.ResultsThe first study phase included 56 patients. The fail rate was 40% largely related to four METS of work. The second study phase included 440 patients. The screen fail rate was 15 patients of 572 (2.6%). Of these, 12 patients of 132 (9.1%) failed the initial screen and were sent to their PCP for further evaluation, and five of 440 (1.4%) patients failed on the day of the procedure. Overall, five of 440 (1.5%) patients would qualify to have their site of service changed for their laryngology procedure from an unmonitored to a monitored setting due to the prescreening criteria.ConclusionFew patients needed further workup based upon the in‐office CV parameters set in this study. Patients with CV risk factors were identified by the screening protocol. Having established hemodynamic parameters in place may improve the safety of IOLP with a very low physician burden.Level of Evidence2b Laryngoscope, 127:1845–1849, 2017