Singh, Anup K.

Background Bedside percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy is a commonly performed procedure in the Intensive Care Unit with a steep learning curve. Checklists and standardized protocols have been established as essential tools for mitigating medical error and enhancing patient safety during critical care procedures. Research Question To assess the feasibility and safety profile of a percutaneous tracheostomy protocol, performed by pulmonary and critical care fellows, which integrates a multi-component checklist, tracheal ultrasound and a unique dual-visualization technique for endotracheal tube management. Study Design and Methods We conducted a retrospective review of all patients (n = 49) who underwent bedside percutaneous tracheostomy using a standardized protocol between November 1, 2022, and October 31, 2024. Key components of the protocol included rigorous pre-procedure assessment with standard tracheal ultrasound stations, a mandatory checklist, and endotracheal tube retraction under dual video laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy. Outcomes analyzed included major bleeding, site infection, and airway complications. Results A total of 49 percutaneous tracheostomy procedures were successfully performed over the 24-month period. No major bleeding episodes or pressure ulcers were identified. There was a single complication involving loss of airway due to endotracheal tube balloon rupture. Critically, the patient was rapidly re-intubated without any hypoxemia or hemodynamic instability, which may be attributed to the immediate availability and use of the dual-visualization safeguard. Interpretation The implementation of this protocolized, checklist-driven approach to bedside percutaneous tracheostomy is feasible and safe within the framework of a pulmonary and critical care fellowship training model. The use of a novel dual-visualization technique (video laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy) during endotracheal tube retraction serves as a robust fail-safe, which may enhance patient safety during airway-compromised events.

AbstractPurpose has often been proposed as a quantitative imaging biomarker for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment response assessment for various tumors. None of the many software tools for quantification are standardized. The ISMRM Open Science Initiative for Perfusion Imaging–Dynamic Contrast‐Enhanced (OSIPI‐DCE) challenge was designed to benchmark methods to better help the efforts to standardize measurement.MethodsA framework was created to evaluate values produced by DCE‐MRI analysis pipelines to enable benchmarking. The perfusion MRI community was invited to apply their pipelines for quantification in glioblastoma from clinical and synthetic patients. Submissions were required to include the entrants' values, the applied software, and a standard operating procedure. These were evaluated using the proposed score defined with accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility components.ResultsAcross the 10 received submissions, the score ranged from 28% to 78% with a 59% median. The accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility scores ranged from 0.54 to 0.92, 0.64 to 0.86, and 0.65 to 1.00, respectively (0–1 = lowest–highest). Manual arterial input function selection markedly affected the reproducibility and showed greater variability in analysis than automated methods. Furthermore, provision of a detailed standard operating procedure was critical for higher reproducibility.ConclusionsThis study reports results from the OSIPI‐DCE challenge and highlights the high inter‐software variability within estimation, providing a framework for ongoing benchmarking against the scores presented. Through this challenge, the participating teams were ranked based on the performance of their software tools in the particular setting of this challenge. In a real‐world clinical setting, many of these tools may perform differently with different benchmarking methodology.