Tracheostomy timing and outcome in critically ill patients with stroke: a meta-analysis and meta-regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stroke patients requiring mechanical ventilation often have a poor prognosis. The optimal timing of tracheostomy and its impact on mortality in stroke patients remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tracheostomy timing and its association with reported all-cause overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were the effect of tracheostomy timing on neurological outcome (modified Rankin Scale, mRS), hospital length of stay (LOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS. METHODS: We searched 5 databases for entries related to acute stroke and tracheostomy from inception to 25 November 2022. We adhered to PRISMA guidance for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Selected studies included (1) ICU-admitted patients who had stroke (either acute ischaemic stroke, AIS or intracerebral haemorrhage, ICH) and received a tracheostomy (with known timing) during their stay and (2) > 20 tracheotomised. Studies primarily reporting sub-arachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) were excluded. Where this was not possible, adjusted meta-analysis and meta-regression with study-level moderators were performed. Tracheostomy timing was analysed continuously and categorically, where early (< 5 days from initiation of mechanical ventilation to tracheostomy) and late (> 10 days) timing was defined per the protocol of SETPOINT2, the largest and most recent randomised controlled trial on tracheostomy timing in stroke patients. RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 17,346 patients (mean age = 59.8 years, female 44%) met the inclusion criteria. ICH, AIS, and SAH comprised 83%, 12%, and 5% of known strokes, respectively. The mean time to tracheostomy was 9.7 days. Overall reported all-cause mortality (adjusted for follow-up) was 15.7%. One in five patients had good neurological outcome (mRS 0-3; median follow-up duration was 180 days). Overall, patients were ventilated for approximately 12 days and had an ICU LOS of 16 days and a hospital LOS of 28 days. A meta-regression analysis using tracheostomy time as a continuous variable showed no statistically significant association between tracheostomy timing and mortality (β = - 0.3, 95% CI = - 2.3 to 1.74, p = 0.8). Early tracheostomy conferred no mortality benefit when compared to late tracheostomy (7.8% vs. 16.4%, p = 0.7). Tracheostomy timing was not associated with secondary outcomes (good neurological outcome, ICU LOS and hospital LOS). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of over 17,000 critically ill stroke patients, the timing of tracheostomy was not associated with mortality, neurological outcomes, or ICU/hospital LOS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42022351732 registered on 17th of August 2022.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.068 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".