No abstract

No abstract

Background The clinical features and outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection who develop a pneumothorax has not been rigorously described or compared to those who do not develop a pneumothorax. Purpose To determine the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection who developed pneumothorax. In addition, we compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients who developed a pneumothorax with those who did not develop a pneumothorax. Methods This study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of all adult critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection who were admitted to intensive care units in 4 tertiary care centers in the United States. Results A total of 842 critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection were analyzed, out of which 594 (71%) were mechanically ventilated. The overall incidence of pneumothorax was 83/842 (10%), and 80/594 (13%) in those who were mechanically ventilated. As compared to mechanically ventilated patients in the non-pneumothorax group, mechanically ventilated patients in the pneumothorax group had worse respiratory parameters at the time of intubation (mean PaO 2 :FiO 2 ratio 105 vs 150, P<0.001 and static respiratory system compliance: 30ml/cmH 2 O vs 39ml/cmH 2 O, P=0.01) and significantly higher in-hospital mortality (63% vs 49%, P=0.04). Conclusion The overall incidence of pneumothorax mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection was 13%. Mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection who developed pneumothorax had worse gas exchange and respiratory mechanics at the time of intubation and had a higher mortality compared to those who did not develop pneumothorax.

The clinical manifestations of foreign body (FB) aspiration can range from an asymptomatic presentation to a life-threatening emergency. Patients may present with acute onset cough, chest pain, breathlessness or sub-acutely with unexplained hemoptysis, non-resolving pneumonia and at times, as an incidental finding on imaging. Patients with iatrogenic FB such as an aspirated broken tooth during difficult intubation or a broken instrument are more common scenarios in the intensive care unit (ICU).Patients with post-obstructive pneumonia with or without sepsis, or variable degree of hemoptysis often require ICU level of care and bronchoscopic interventions. Rigid bronchoscopy has traditionally been the modality of choice; however, with the innovation in instrumentation and wider availability of flexible bronchoscopes, most of the FB removal is now successfully performed using flexible bronchoscopy.Proceduralists choose instruments in accordance with their training and expertise. We describe the use of most common instruments including forceps, balloon catheters, and baskets. Role of cryoprobe and LASER in FB removal is reviewed as well. In general, larger working channel bronchoscopes are preferred; however, smaller working channel bronchoscopes may be used in situations when the patients are intubated with a smaller diameter endotracheal or tracheostomy tubes. Large size FB are removed en bloc with the grasping tool, bronchoscope, and endotracheal or tracheostomy tube, requiring preparation to safely re-establish the airway. After FB removal, bronchoscopy is re-performed to identify any residual FB, assess any injury to the airway, suction post-obstructive secretions or pus, control any active bleeding and remove granulation tissue that may be obstructing the airway. Additional interventions like balloon dilatation may be required to dislodge an impacted FB or to maintain patency of bronchial lumen. If bronchoscopic methods fail, surgery may be required for retrieval of FB in symptomatic patients or to resect suppurative or necrotizing lung process. Multidisciplinary approach involving intensivists, surgeons, and anesthesiologists is the key to optimal patient outcomes.