Background and Purpose: Mechanical ventilation after stroke is associated with high mortality. However, little is known about survivors who require prolonged ventilatory assistance and tracheostomy. Our goal was to assess the rate of pulmonary complication, effect of early tracheostomy and prognosis of patients with stroke requiring prolonged ventilatory support. Methods: Retrospective review of 97 patients with stroke who required ventilatory assistance and tracheostomy admitted to a single teaching hospital between 1976 and 2000. Outcome was defined using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Results: Poor outcome (GOS 1–3) occurred in 74% of patients at 1 year and it was associated with older age (p = 0.03), prior history of brain damage (p = 0.02), and neurological worsening after intubation (p < 0.01). However, long-term functional recovery (GOS 4–5) was possible and more likely after strokes involving the posterior circulation (p = 0.03). Pulmonary complications were prevalent and more frequent before tracheostomy (68 vs. 20% after tracheostomy) but did not determine functional outcome. Mean duration of mechanical ventilation was 11 ± 19 days and did not significantly differ between outcome groups. Early tracheostomy correlated with shorter ICU and hospital stays (p < 0.01 in both cases). Conclusions: Surviving patients with stroke who require prolonged ventilatory assistance and tracheostomy can have a better outcome than previously reported. Aggressive care is justified in patients who do not continue to deteriorate neurologically. Pulmonary complications are frequent but treatable. Early tracheostomy can shorten ICU and hospital stays and reduce costs.

Keywords:
Stroke, Mechanical ventilation, Outcome, Tracheostomy
1.
Qureshi AI, Suarez JI, Parekh PD, Bhardwaj A: Prediction and timing of tracheostomy in patients with infratentorial lesions requiring mechanical ventilatory support. Crit Care Med 2000;28:1383–1387.
2.
Steiner T, Mendoza G, De Georgia M, Schellinger P, Holle R, Hacke W: Prognosis of stroke patients requiring mechanical ventilation in a neurological critical care unit. Stroke 1997;28:711–715.
3.
Bushnell CD, Phillips-Bute BG, Laskowitz DT, Lynch JR, Chilukuri V, Borel CO: Survival and outcome after endotracheal intubation for acute stroke. Neurology 1999;52:1374–1381.
4.
Gujjar AR, Deibert E, Manno EM, Duff S, Diringer MN: Mechanical ventilation for ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage: Indications, timing, and outcome. Neurology 1998;51:447–451.
5.
Bestue M, Ara JR, Martin J, Iturriaga C, Tejada A: Mechanical ventilation for ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurology 1999;52:1922–1923.
6.
Burtin P, Bollaert PE, Feldmann L, Nace L, Lelarge P, Bauer P, Larcan A: Prognosis of stroke patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 1994;20:32–36.
7.
Berrouschot J, Rossler A, Koster J, Schneider D: Mechanical ventilation in patients with hemispheric ischemic stroke. Crit Care Med 2000;28:2956–2961.
8.
Santoli F, De Jonghe B, Hayon J, Tran B, Piperaud M, Merrer J, Outin H: Mechanical ventilation in patients with acute ischemic stroke: Survival and outcome at one year. Intensive Care Med 2001;27:1141–1146.
9.
Mayer SA, Copeland D, Bernardini GL, Boden-Albala B, Lennihan L, Kossoff S, Sacco RL: Cost and outcome of mechanical ventilation for life-threatening stroke. Stroke 2000;31:2346–2353.
10.
El-Ad B, Bornstein NM, Fuchs P, Korczyn AD: Mechanical ventilation in stroke patients: Is it worthwhile? Neurology 1996;47:657–659.
11.
Leker RR, Ben-Hur T: Prognostic factors in artificially ventilated stroke patients. J Neurol Sci 2000;176:83–87.
12.
Grotta J, Pasteur W, Khwaja G, Hamel T, Fisher M, Ramirez A: Elective intubation for neurologic deterioration after stroke. Neurology 1995;45:640–644.
13.
Mayer SA, Boden-Albala B, Bernardini GL, Lennihan L, Kossoff SB, Chen X, Sacco RL: Intubation for life-threatening stroke: A population-based study (abstract). Neurology 1997;48(suppl):A367.
14.
Cruz-Flores S, Thompson DW, Burh CM, Eichholtz KM: Outcome of patients with ischemic stroke requiring mechanical ventilation (abstract). Neurology 1997;48(suppl):A307.
15.
Lessire H, Denis B, Vankeerberghen L, Weyers P: Prognosis of stroke patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. Intensive Care Med 1996;22:174–175.
16.
Wijdicks EFM, Scott JP: Outcome in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion requiring mechanical ventilation. Stroke 1996;27:1301–1303.
17.
Wijdicks EFM, Scott JP: Causes of mechanical ventilation in patients with hemispheric ischemic stroke. Mayo Clin Proc 1997;72:210–213.
18.
Heyland DK, Cook DI, Griffith L, Keenan SP, Brun-Buisson C: The attributable morbidity and mortality of ventilator-associated pneumonia in the critically ill patient. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;159:1249–1256.
19.
Bernard GR, Artigas A, Brigham KL, Carlet J, Falke K, Hudson L, Lamy M, LeGall JR, Morris A, Spragg R: The American-European Consensus Conference on ARDS: Definitions, mechanisms, relevant outcomes, and clinical trial coordination. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994;149:818–824.
20.
Jennett B, Bond M: Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage: A practical scale. Lancet 1975;i:480–484.
21.
Kollef MH: Ventilator-associated pneumonia: A multivariate analysis. JAMA 1993;270:1965–1970.
22.
Ibrahim EH, Tracy L, Hill C, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: The occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a community hospital: Risk factors and clinical outcomes. Chest 2001;120:555–561.
23.
Heffner JE: Timing tracheostomy: Calendar watching or individualization of care? Chest 1998;114:361–363.
24.
Meziak DE, Meade MO, Todd TRJ: The timing of tracheostomy: A systematic review. Chest 1998;114:605–609.
© 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel
2004
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.