Abstract
Purpose
Long-term tracheal stent placement can increase the risk of stent-related complications; hence, removal of the stent after stabilization is attempted. However, little evidence has been established regarding the risk factors for tracheal restenosis. We aimed to identify the risk factors for tracheal restenosis in patients with post-intubation tracheal stenosis (PITS) and post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis (PTTS).
Materials and Methods
We retrospectively analyzed patients with PITS and PTTS between January 2004 and December 2019. Patients were classified into a success or failure group according to treatment outcomes. Patients with successful stent removal were defined as patients who did not require additional intervention after stent removal during the follow-up period. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with tracheal restenosis.
Results
Among 269 stented patients, 130 patients who had removed the stent were enrolled in this study. During the follow-up period, 73 (56.2%) patients had a stable clinical course; however, 57 (43.8%) patients had restenosis. The proportion of trauma-induced intubation was higher in the success group than in the failure group (p=0.026), and the median stent length was shorter in the success group (45 mm) than in the failure group (50 mm, p=0.001). On multivariate analysis, trauma-induced intubation [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.329; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.117–0.927; p=0.036], and stent length <50 mm (aOR, 0.274; 95% CI, 0.130–0.578; p=0.001) were associated with a decreased risk of restenosis.
Conclusion
Trauma-induced intubation and stent length were associated with successful stent removal.
Keywords: Airway stents, interventional bronchoscopy, post-intubation tracheal stenosis, post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis, tracheal restenosis
INTRODUCTION
Endotracheal intubation and tracheostomy are the most common causes of benign acquired tracheal stenosis.1 Post-intubation tracheal stenosis (PITS) can be caused by high-volume, high-pressure cuffs leading to mucosal and pressure injuries.2,3 Post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis (PTTS) occurs due to an abnormal wound healing process accompanied by the formation of excessive granulation tissue in the stoma after tracheostomy, which is presumed to be related to inflammation and/or infection of the stoma and cartilage damage during tracheostomy.4 The reported prevalence of tracheal stenosis after intubation varies from 6% to 21%,5,6,7 and the estimated incidence of tracheal stenosis in the general population is 4.9 cases per million per year.8
The generally preferred treatment for PITS and PTTS is surgical management, such as tracheal resection and end-to-end anastomosis.7 However, some patients are unable to undergo surgical procedures due to underlying diseases. In such patients, bronchoscopic intervention is considered as an alternative to surgical management. Endoscopic techniques for the management of tracheal stenosis include mechanical or balloon dilatation, laser ablation therapy, and endotracheal stent insertion.9 Tracheal stenting is indicated when airway patency cannot be preserved despite other endoscopic therapeutic techniques. However, long-term stent placement can increase the risk of stent-related late complications, such as mucostasis, granulation tissue formation, and stent migration.10,11 Therefore, after maintaining the stent for a certain period, stent removal is attempted in patients who are expected to maintain airway patency. Our previous studies have demonstrated that the success rate of tracheal stenting is approximately 40%.12,13,14 However, approximately 60% of patients require repeated endoscopic intervention and/or surgical treatment. Furthermore, prognostic factors for post-tuberculous bronchial stenosis (PTBS) after stent removal have been reported in several studies15,16,17; however, to date, prognostic factors for tracheal stenosis in PITS/PTTS patients after stent removal have not been well elucidated. In actual clinical practice, tracheal stenosis is more likely to cause respiratory failure due to central airway obstruction. Therefore, it is important to predict which patients are at a high risk of restenosis before considering stent removal in patients with tracheal stenosis. Accordingly, we attempted to identify potential risk factors for tracheal restenosis after stent removal in patients with PITS and PTTS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients
We retrospectively reviewed all patients with airway stenosis who underwent rigid bronchoscopy between January 2004 and December 2019 at Samsung Medical Center, which is a 1979-bed referral hospital and performs the most rigid bronchoscopic interventions in South Korea. The Institutional Review Board of Samsung Medical Center approved the collection, analysis, and publication of the data (IRB No. 2021-07-130). The requirement for informed consent was waived due to the retrospective nature of the study.
Airway intervention techniques, follow-up and removal of the stent
The airway anatomy was evaluated using chest radiography, computed tomography (CT), and flexible bronchoscopy. Airway interventions were performed according to standard techniques.9,18 After induction of general anesthesia and intubation with a rigid bronchoscope tube (Bryan Co.,Woburn, MA, USA), a flexible bronchoscope (BF 1T260 Olympus Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) was introduced through the rigid bronchoscope tube to examine airway stenosis. Various combinations of airway intervention techniques (mechanical dilatation, balloon dilatation, laser, and silicone stent insertion) were used depending on the characteristics and subtype of tracheal stenosis as well as the patient’s medical condition.
Airway stent insertion was considered when laser treatment or mechanical dilatation did not satisfactorily maintain airway patency in the patient. It was implanted using the standard technique described by Dumon.19 The appropriate stent size was determined by an interventionist by measuring the actual length of stenosis through the scale mark of the flexible bronchoscope. During the study period, three types of silicone stents were used for the treatment of tracheal stenosis: Natural stent (M1S Co. Seoul, South Korea), Dumon stent (Novatech, La Ciotat, France), and Montgomery T-tube (Koken, Tokyo, Japan). Natural stent was developed at the Samsung Medical Center in 2002 and was used for the treatment of benign tracheobronchial stenosis. Studies in a canine model of tracheal stenosis and in patients with benign tracheobronchial stenosis have demonstrated that the Natural stent is as effective and safe as the Dumon stent.20,21 However, since 2015, the production of Natural stent has been suspended due to commercial issues, and Dumon stents have been mainly used in clinical practice. A Montgomery T-tube was considered in patients with a high risk of mucostasis or tracheal stenosis close to the glottis.22,23
Following stent placement, patients underwent simple chest radiography and spirometry for evaluation of their condition at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the intervention. We used bronchoscopy and chest CT to reevaluate the stent location and airway patency if the patients complained of respiratory symptoms and had abnormal findings on chest radiography or before planning their stent removal. Stent removal was generally considered when the patients maintained the stent in a stable condition for more than 6 months and air pockets were detected on chest CT. To confirm a stable condition after stent removal, follow-up was performed at least once within 1 month after removal.
If symptoms and signs of airway stenosis developed after removal of the tracheal stent, interventional bronchoscopy and/or stent insertion were repeated in the patient. Surgical management or permanent tracheostomy was performed in patients with ineffective or intolerable tracheal stents.
Data collection and clinical outcome
We collected data from the study population including demographics, etiology, characteristics of tracheal stenosis, stent duration, and additional interventional and radiologic data before stent removal. We used the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification to evaluate the individual performance status.24 An ASA physical status ≥3 was considered a poor performance status. To evaluate the severity of tracheal stenosis, we used the Myer–Cotton stenosis grading system.25
We measured the air pocket length, air pocket score, and air pocket density on CT scans before removal of the stent. Based on a previous study,17 an air pocket was defined as a tracheobronchial air column in the space between the outer surface of the stent and the adjacent airway wall. The air pocket score was calculated as the summation of the number of quadrants containing air pockets in all CT sections extending from the proximal to the distal end of the stent. In addition, we introduced the concept of air pocket density, which is defined as the value obtained after dividing the air pocket score by the stent length.
Clinical outcomes were evaluated during the follow-up period after stent removal. Patients were divided into two groups according to treatment outcomes: success and failure. The success group comprised patients whose airway patency was maintained without an airway prosthesis during the follow-up period, and the failure group comprised patients with recurrence of symptoms and signs of tracheal stenosis during the follow-up period that required additional endoscopic intervention. Patients with successful stent removal were defined as those who did not require additional intervention after stent removal during the follow-up period.
Statistical analysis
SPSS software (IBM SPSS statistics version 27, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for all statistical analyses. Data are presented as number (%) or interquartile range (IQR). Categorical variables were compared using Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Continuous variables were compared using Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis with backward stepwise selection was performed to determine the risk factors for tracheal restenosis after stent removal. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
RESULTS
The overall clinical course of the study population is summarized in Fig. 1. During the study period, 357 patients were diagnosed with PITS (n=215) and PTTS (n=142). In 269 of the 357 patients who received stents for tracheal stenosis, stent removal was performed in 143 patients. After excluding 13 patients who were not followed up after stent removal, a total of 130 patients were enrolled in the study. Of the 130 patients, 73 (56.2%) had a stable clinical course after removal of the tracheal stent. However, 57 (43.8%) patients underwent re-intervention for restenosis. Most restenosis cases (88%) developed within 3 months of stent removal. Fig. 2 shows representative cases of success and failure of tracheal stent removal in patients with PITS/PTTS.
Fig. 1. Clinical course of patients with PITS and PTTS. PITS, post-intubation tracheal stenosis; PTTS, post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis.
Fig. 2. Representative cases of success (A–D) and failure (E–H) of tracheal stent removal. (A–D) A 56-year-old female patient underwent intubation for 10 days due to subarachnoid hemorrhage. Two months later, she complained of dyspnea. (A) CT scan showing tracheal stenosis at the level of the thoracic inlet (arrow). (B) Bronchoscopic findings of tracheal stenosis. A 40-mm tracheal stent was inserted and maintained for 19 months. (C) CT scan before stent removal. (D) Chest radiograph obtained 1 year after stent removal. During the 1-year follow-up period after stent removal, the patient remained stable without restenosis. (E–F) A 46-year-old female patient underwent intubation for 3 weeks due to epilepsy. She complained of dyspnea 2 weeks after extubation. (E) CT scan showing stenosis of the upper trachea (arrow). The patient underwent an emergency tracheostomy for tracheal stenosis (arrow). (F) Bronchoscopy shows a near-complete obstruction of the trachea above the stoma. A 60-mm tracheal stent was inserted and maintained for 2 years. (G) CT scan before stent removal. Ten days after stent removal, the patient complained of dyspnea again and (H) the CT scan showed tracheal restenosis (arrow). CT, computed tomography.
Baseline characteristics
The median age was 56 years (IQR, 45–66), and 64 (49.2%) patients were male (Table 1). Ninety-eight (75.4%) patients were intubated for medical reasons, while 32 (24.6%) patients were intubated for surgical reasons. No significant difference was found in baseline characteristics between the two groups except for the proportion of patients who underwent trauma-induced endotracheal intubation, which was more frequent in the successful group than in the failure group (26.0% vs. 10.5%, p=0.026). Due to dyspnea, only 58 (44.6%) of the patients were able to perform the pulmonary function test. The median forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 54% of the predicted value (IQR, 34–71), and the median forced vital capacity was 82% of the predicted value (IQR, 68–92).
Table 1. Baseline Characteristics of the Two Groups.
| Total (n=130) | Success (n=73) | Failure (n=57) | p value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yr | 56 (45–66) | 54 (45–70) | 58 (45–64) | 0.877 | ||
| Sex, male | 64 (49.2) | 39 (53.4) | 25 (43.9) | 0.279 | ||
| BMI, kg/m2 | 22.9 (20.4–25.5) | 22.6 (20.4–25.9) | 23.1 (20.4–25.3) | 0.827 | ||
| Comorbidities | ||||||
| DM | 39 (30.0) | 20 (27.4) | 19 (33.0) | 0.464 | ||
| Neurologic sequelae | 35 (26.9) | 22 (30.1) | 13 (22.8) | 0.350 | ||
| Cardiovascular disease | 29 (22.3) | 15 (20.5) | 14 (24.6) | 0.585 | ||
| Chronic lung disease | 15 (11.5) | 7 (9.6) | 8 (14.0) | 0.431 | ||
| Cause of intubation or tracheostomy | ||||||
| Medical | 98 (75.4) | 52 (71.2) | 46 (80.7) | 0.214 | ||
| Respiratory failure | 26 (20.0) | 16 (21.9) | 10 (17.5) | 0.536 | ||
| Neurologic disease | 26 (20.0) | 12 (16.4) | 14 (24.6) | 0.251 | ||
| Cardiovascular disease | 21 (16.2) | 11 (15.1) | 10 (17.5) | 0.704 | ||
| Drug intoxication | 12 (9.2) | 6 (8.2) | 6 (10.5) | 0.652 | ||
| Septic shock | 10 (7.7) | 5 (6.8) | 5 (8.8) | 0.748 | ||
| Other* | 3 (2.3) | 2 (2.7) | 1 (1.8) | >0.999 | ||
| Surgical | 32 (24.6) | 21 (28.8) | 11 (19.3) | 0.214 | ||
| Trauma | 25 (19.2) | 19 (26.0) | 6 (10.5) | 0.026 | ||
| Postoperative | 7 (5.4) | 2 (2.7) | 5 (8.8) | 0.239 | ||
| ASA physical status ≥3† | 51 (39.2) | 30 (41.1) | 21 (36.8) | 0.622 | ||
| Baseline spirometry (n=58)‡ | ||||||
| FEV1, % predicted | 54 (34–71) | 51 (30–70) | 61 (43–72) | 0.375 | ||
| FVC, % predicted | 82 (68–92) | 85 (65–96) | 78 (68–90) | 0.332 | ||
BMI, body mass index; DM, diabetes mellitus; ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; FEV1, forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FVC, forced vital capacity; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Data are presented as n (%) or median (interquartile range).
*Diabetic ketoacidosis, hypoglycemia, and obesity; †ASA physical status 3 indicates patients with severe systemic disease (e.g., poorly controlled DM or hypertension, COPD); ‡Spirometry before stent insertion was available for 58 patients.
Characteristics of tracheal stenosis
Among the study population, the number of patients with PITS and PTTS was 93 (71.5%) and 37 (28.5%), respectively (Table 2). The median length of the stenosis was 30 mm (IQR, 25–35 mm). The location, severity, and length of stenosis were similar between the two groups. Among the stenosis types, granulation was more frequently observed in the failure group than in the success group (28.1% vs. 12.3%, p=0.024). Forty-one (31.5%) patients suffered from respiratory failure due to tracheal stenosis. Owing to respiratory failure in patients, intubation (n=17), emergency tracheostomy (n=23), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n=2) were performed before interventional bronchoscopy. The median duration of intubation and tracheostomy was 10 days (IQR, 7–15) and 60 days (IQR, 35–116), respectively.
Table 2. Characteristics of Tracheal Stenosis.
| Total (n=130) | Success (n=73) | Failure (n=57) | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Etiology of tracheal stenosis | 0.207 | ||||
| Post-intubation | 93 (71.5) | 49 (52.7) | 44 (46.7) | ||
| Post-tracheostomy | 37 (28.5) | 24 (64.9) | 13 (35.1) | ||
| Location of stenosis | 0.904 | ||||
| Subglottis to upper trachea | 101 (77.7) | 57 (78.1) | 44 (77.2) | ||
| Mid to lower trachea | 29 (22.3) | 16 (21.9) | 13 (22.8) | ||
| Severity of stenosis* (myer-cotton grade) | 0.570† | ||||
| I | 6 (4.6) | 4 (5.5) | 2 (3.5) | ||
| II | 34 (26.2) | 18 (24.7) | 16 (28.1) | ||
| III | 86 (66.2) | 50 (68.5) | 36 (63.2) | ||
| IV | 4 (3.1) | 1 (1.4) | 3 (5.3) | ||
| Length of stenosis, mm | 30 (25–35) | 30 (26–35) | 29 (25–35) | 0.886 | |
| Stenosis type‡ | |||||
| Fibrosis | 112 (86.2) | 64 (87.7) | 48 (84.2) | 0.571 | |
| Granulation | 25 (19.2) | 9 (12.3) | 16 (28.1) | 0.024 | |
| Malacia | 10 (7.7) | 8 (11.0) | 2 (3.5) | 0.184 | |
| Mixed | 17 (13.1) | 8 (11.0) | 9 (15.8) | 0.418 | |
| Respiratory failure before intervention§ | 41 (31.5) | 18 (24.7) | 23 (40.4) | 0.056 | |
| Intubation duration, day (n=92)¶ | 10 (7–15) | 10 (7–15) | 11 (7–17) | 0.575 | |
| Tracheostomy duration, day (n=35)‖ | 60 (35–116) | 47 (27–104) | 66 (46–217) | 0.170 | |
| Time interval of injury to stenosis, day | 62 (38–107) | 65 (38–115) | 61 (39–96) | 0.620 | |
| PITS | 52 (36–87) | 51 (36–85) | 54 (36–89) | 0.936 | |
| PTTS | 93 (61–387) | 107 (65–384) | 78 (61–390) | 0.484 | |
PITS, post-intubation tracheal stenosis; PTTS, post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis; ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Data are presented as n (%) or median (interquartile range).
*Categorization based on the percentage reduction in cross-sectional area Grade I, ≤50% luminal stenosis; Grade II, 51%–70% luminal stenosis; Grade III, 71%–99% luminal stenosis; and Grade IV, no lumen; †p for trend=0.683; ‡Patients (n=17) had more than one type of stenosis; §Intubation (n=17), tracheostomy (n=23), ECMO (n=2) state before interventional bronchoscopy; ¶Missing value=38; ∥Missing value=2.
Treatment modalities and characteristics of stent
Natural stents were most commonly used in the patients (91/130, 70.0%) (Table 3). The median stent length was 45 mm (IQR, 40–50 mm). Compared to the failure group, the success group had a shorter stent length (45 mm vs. 50 mm, p=0.001). The proportion of patients with a stent length <50 mm was higher in the success group than in the failure group (64.4% vs. 33.3%, p<0.001). The duration of stenting did not differ between the two groups. The median duration of overall stent placement for each group was 454 days (IQR, 246–890 days) in the success group and 436 days (IQR, 240–811 days) in the failure group. Eighty-one (62.8%) patients maintained the stent for more than 12 months. Before stent removal, 45 (34.6%) patients underwent additional interventional bronchoscopy. In most of the patients, the stent was removed after confirming the presence of air pockets (106/130, 81.5%). There was no difference between the success (8/57, 14.0%) and failure (16/73, 21.9%) groups in the proportion of patients whose air pockets could not be identified due to the lack of available CT scans before stent removal (p=0.267).
Table 3. Treatment Modalities and Characteristics of Stent.
| Total (n=130) | Success (n=73) | Failure (n=57) | p value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stent type | |||||
| Natural stent | 91 (70.0) | 51 (69.9) | 40 (70.2) | 0.969 | |
| Dumon stent | 35 (26.9) | 21 (28.8) | 14 (24.6) | 0.592 | |
| Montgomery t-tube | 3 (2.3) | 1 (1.4) | 2 (5.3) | 0.319 | |
| Stent length, mm | 45 (40–50) | 45 (40–50) | 50 (43–50) | 0.001 | |
| Stent length <50 mm | 66 (50.8) | 47 (64.4) | 19 (33.3) | <0.001 | |
| Duration of stenting, day | 448 (253–833) | 454 (246–890) | 436 (240–811) | 0.583 | |
| Duration of stent >1 year | 81 (62.8) | 46 (63.0) | 35 (61.4) | 0.851 | |
| Duration of stent >18 months | 54 (41.5) | 31 (42.5) | 23 (40.4) | 0.808 | |
| Additional intervention before stent removal* | 45 (34.6) | 22 (30.1) | 23 (40.4) | 0.225 | |
| Air pocket in CT before stent removal (n=106)† | |||||
| Air pocket length, mm | 32.5 (27.5–40.0) | 34.0 (27.8–41.0) | 32.5 (26.3–37.5) | 0.345 | |
| Air pocket score | 26 (20–36) | 25 (20–35) | 26 (20–35) | 0.522 | |
| Air pocket density‡ | 0.57 (0.38–0.80) | 0.56 (0.39–0.87) | 0.58 (0.38–0.73) | 0.235 | |
Data are presented as n (%) or median (interquartile range).
*Reasons for additional interventions included stent migration (n=25), granulation tissue overgrowth (n=16), additional stenosis (n=8), mucostasis (n=3), and malacia (n=2). Nine patients had more than one reason; †24 patients did not have available CT scans before stent removal; ‡Air pocket score/stent length.
The median air pocket length, air pocket score, and median value of air pocket density were 32.5 mm (IQR, 27.5–40.0), 26 (IQR 20–36), and 0.57 (IQR 0.38–0.80), respectively. None of these air pocket indices showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups.
Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors for tracheal restenosis
Tracheal restenosis occurred in 57 (43.8%) patients after stent removal during the follow-up period. The median time-to-restenosis was 20 days (IQR, 13–39). Eleven of the 57 patients (19.3%) could not tolerate the stent, which eventually led to surgical intervention. In patients who underwent intubation due to a traumatic event, the risk of tracheal restenosis was lower than other causes of intubation or tracheostomy [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.329; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.117–0.927; p=0.036], and a stent length <50 mm was associated with a decreased risk of tracheal restenosis (aOR 0.274; 95% CI 0.130–0.578; p=0.001) (Table 4).
Table 4. Factors associated with Tracheal Restenosis after Stent Removal.
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | p value | aOR (95% CI) | p value | ||
| Age | 1.000 (0.980–1.020) | 0.992 | - | - | |
| Sex, male | 0.680 (0.339–1.367) | 0.280 | - | - | |
| BMI | 0.986 (0.907–1.072) | 0.747 | - | - | |
| Comorbidities | |||||
| DM | 1.325 (0.624–2.815) | 0.464 | - | - | |
| Neurologic sequelae | 0.685 (0.309–1.517) | 0.351 | - | - | |
| Cardiovascular disease | 1.259 (0.550–2.882) | 0.586 | - | - | |
| Chronic lung disease | 1.539 (0.523–4.531) | 0.434 | - | - | |
| Cause of intubation or tracheostomy | |||||
| Respiratory failure | 0.758 (0.315–1.826) | 0.537 | - | - | |
| Neurologic disease | 1.655 (0.697–3.928) | 0.253 | - | - | |
| Cardiovascular disease | 1.199 (0.470–3.059) | 0.704 | - | - | |
| Trauma | 0.334 (0.124–0.904) | 0.031 | 0.329 (0.117–0.927) | 0.036 | |
| ASA physical status ≥3 | 0.836 (0.410–1.704) | 0.622 | - | - | |
| Etiology of tracheal stenosis | |||||
| Post-intubation | Reference | - | Reference | - | |
| Post-tracheostomy | 0.665 (0.306–1.444) | 0.302 | - | - | |
| Location of stenosis | |||||
| Subglottis to upper trachea | Reference | - | Reference | - | |
| Mid to lower trachea | 1.053 (0.459–2.416) | 0.904 | - | - | |
| Severity of stenosis | |||||
| Grade I–II | Reference | - | Reference | - | |
| Grade III–IV | 0.935 (0.442–1.978) | 0.860 | - | - | |
| Length of stenosis | 1.015 (0.961–1.072) | 0.592 | - | - | |
| Stenosis type | |||||
| Fibrosis | 0.750 (0.277–2.032) | 0.572 | - | - | |
| Granulation | 2.775 (1.122–6.866) | 0.027 | - | - | |
| Malacia | 0.295 (0.060–1.450) | 0.133 | - | - | |
| Mixed | 1.523 (0.548–4.237) | 0.420 | - | - | |
| Respiratory failure before intervention | 2.067 (0.976–4.378) | 0.058 | - | - | |
| Stent length <50 mm | 0.277 (0.133–0.574) | <0.001 | 0.274 (0.130–0.578) | 0.001 | |
| Duration of stent >1 year | 0.934 (0.457–1.907) | 0.934 | - | - | |
| Additional intervention before stent removal | 1.568 (0.757–3.248) | 0.226 | - | - | |
BMI, body mass index; DM, diabetes mellitus; ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; aOR, adjusted odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
DISCUSSION
We compared the differences between the groups that successfully maintained and failed to maintain airway patency after stent removal and tried to identify the prognostic factors for restenosis in patients with PITS and PTTS. In our study population, 56% of the patients had successful stent removal without restenosis. We showed that trauma-induced intubation and stent length <50 mm were good prognostic factors for tracheal restenosis. The presence of an air pocket and duration of stent did not show a significant association with restenosis in PITS and PTTS patients, which had been reported as prognostic factors in patients with PTBS.17,26 To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study to demonstrate the outcomes of tracheal stenting in patients with PITS and PTTS who were managed with silicone stents. The restenosis rate after stent removal was 44%, which was within the range of 19%–70% for restenosis rate reported in previous studies.12,13,14,27,28
In the present study, the most common cause of trauma (80%) that required tracheal intubation was brain injury after traumatic events. Therefore, when inferred from the multivariate results, we can suspect that the prognosis of traumatic brain injury is better than that of non-traumatic brain injury, such as stroke, epilepsy, and other medical problems, in patients with tracheal stents. This result was consistent with previous research suggesting that patients with traumatic brain injury show greater functional improvement than those with non-traumatic brain injury,29 and successful removal of airway prosthesis is correlated with performance status.13
Our study demonstrated that the length of the tracheal stent (≥50 mm) was more correlated with tracheal restenosis than the length of the tracheal stenosis measured by imaging. The actual length of the stent is determined by bronchoscopy, which extends 1 cm beyond the proximal and distal margins of the stenosis. However, there are some limitations in the evaluation of stenosis by imaging. First, it is difficult to evaluate the exact start and endpoints of tracheal stenosis using only images. Second, since it is difficult for a patient with severe dyspnea to undergo a CT scan in the full inspiration state, the length of the stenosis may be overestimated when the image is taken in the expiration state. Therefore, we believe that the length of the stent determined during the procedure better reflects the actual length of stenosis and has a meaningful result associated with restenosis. Furthermore, the tracheal stent is a foreign body, and a longer stent length results in an increased area of tracheal mucosal irritation and inflammation, leading to greater granulation tissue formation and fibrosis. A previous study showed that there is a direct correlation between mucus plugging and granulation tissue formation when the length of the stent was over 60 mm in patients with malignant airway lesions.30 Another study reported that tracheal stenosis >30 mm was associated with a reduced chance of procedural success.31 Eventually, seven of the patients who had a stent ≥50 mm in our study underwent surgical treatment. Based on these results, if surgical treatment is feasible for a patient expected to require a long stent, it may be an option to consider surgery from the very beginning.
Verma, et al.17 reported that the extent of air pockets in chest CT was a prognostic factor in patients with PTBS. In this study, the air pocket score was defined as the number of quadrants containing air pockets in section 1 (most proximal section, cranial to caudal)+number of quadrants containing air pockets in section 2+number of quadrants containing air pockets in section n (most distal section). Based on this, we analyzed whether the air pocket was associated with tracheal restenosis in patients with PITS and PTTS. Additionally, we introduced the concept of air pocket density, which was defined as the value obtained by dividing the air pocket score with the stent length. The air pocket score, length, and density did not differ significantly between the two groups. The previous PTBS study was conducted without knowledge of the importance of the air pocket. However, after knowing the importance of air pockets, most patients in this study attempted to remove stents when air pockets were present. We believe that these differences in study subjects resulted in a negative result of air pockets for restenosis.
Our study had several limitations. First, since this was a retrospective study based on single-center data, it could not represent all patients with PITS and PTTS. Furthermore, our center performed the most rigid bronchoscopic interventions in South Korea, and patients with complex airway stenosis and those who failed the procedure were referred to our hospital. Therefore, a selection bias may have occurred in this study. Second, since most of the patients had intubation or tracheostomy performed in other hospitals, there were incomplete and missing data for the exact periods of intubation and tracheostomy in some patients. Third, we grouped PITS and PTTS together in this study, although our previous study suggested that PITS and PTTS may have differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes.13,32 To overcome these limitations, further prospective and multicenter studies are required.
In conclusion, trauma-induced intubation and stent length <50 mm were associated with successful stent removal in patients with PITS and PTTS. Clinicians may need to pay attention to the expected length of the stent when deciding to perform interventional bronchoscopy and tracheal stenting in their patients.
Footnotes
The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
- Conceptualization: Hojoong Kim.
- Data curation: Byeong-Ho Jeong and Hojoong Kim.
- Formal analysis: Daegeun Lee and Byeong-Ho Jeong.
- Investigation: Daegeun Lee.
- Methodology: Byeong-Ho Jeong and Hojoong Kim.
- Project administration: Byeong-Ho Jeong and Hojoong Kim.
- Resources: Byeong-Ho Jeong and Hojoong Kim.
- Supervision: Hojoong Kim.
- Validation: Daegeun Lee and Byeong-Ho Jeong.
- Visualization: Daegeun Lee and Byeong-Ho Jeong.
- Writing—original draft: Daegeun Lee.
- Writing—review & editing: Byeong-Ho Jeong and Hojoong Kim.
- Approval of final manuscript: all authors.
References
- 1.Lorenz RR. Adult laryngotracheal stenosis: etiology and surgical management. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;11:467–472. doi: 10.1097/00020840-200312000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Weymuller EA., Jr Laryngeal injury from prolonged endotracheal intubation. Laryngoscope. 1988;98:1–15. doi: 10.1288/00005537-198808001-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Bishop MJ. Mechanisms of laryngotracheal injury following prolonged tracheal intubation. Chest. 1989;96:185–186. doi: 10.1378/chest.96.1.185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Stauffer JL, Olson DE, Petty TL. Complications and consequences of endotracheal intubation and tracheotomy. A prospective study of 150 critically ill adult patients. Am J Med. 1981;70:65–76. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(81)90413-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Esteller-More E, Ibanez J, Matino E, Adema JM, Nolla M, Quer IM. Prognostic factors in laryngotracheal injury following intubation and/or tracheotomy in ICU patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005;262:880–883. doi: 10.1007/s00405-005-0929-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sarper A, Ayten A, Eser I, Ozbudak O, Demircan A. Tracheal stenosis aftertracheostomy or intubation: review with special regard to cause and management. Tex Heart Inst J. 2005;32:154–158. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Grillo HC, Donahue DM, Mathisen DJ, Wain JC, Wright CD. Postintubation tracheal stenosis. Treatment and results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1995;109:486–492. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5223(95)70279-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Nouraei SA, Ma E, Patel A, Howard DJ, Sandhu GS. Estimating the population incidence of adult post-intubation laryngotracheal stenosis. Clin Otolaryngol. 2007;32:411–412. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2007.01484.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kim H. Stenting therapy for stenosing airway disease. Respirology. 1998;3:221–228. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.1998.tb00126.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Ryu YJ, Kim H, Yu CM, Choi JC, Kwon YS, Kwon OJ. Use of silicone stents for the management of post-tuberculosis tracheobronchial stenosis. Eur Respir J. 2006;28:1029–1035. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00020906. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Shin JH, Song HY, Shim TS. Management of tracheobronchial strictures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2004;27:314–324. doi: 10.1007/s00270-003-0134-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Lim SY, Kim H, Jeon K, Um SW, Koh WJ, Suh GY, et al. Prognostic factors for endotracheal silicone stenting in the management of inoperable post-intubation tracheal stenosis. Yonsei Med J. 2012;53:565–570. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2012.53.3.565. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Shin B, Kim K, Jeong BH, Eom JS, Song WJ, Kang HK, et al. Clinical significance of differentiating post-intubation and post-tracheostomy tracheal stenosis. Respirology. 2017;22:513–520. doi: 10.1111/resp.12925. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Park HY, Kim H, Koh WJ, Suh GY, Chung MP, Kwon OJ. Natural stent in the management of post-intubation tracheal stenosis. Respirology. 2009;14:583–588. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2009.01498.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Lim SY, Park HK, Jeon K, Um SW, Koh WJ, Suh GY, et al. Factors predicting outcome following airway stenting for post-tuberculosis tracheobronchial stenosis. Respirology. 2011;16:959–964. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2011.01998.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Lee JY, Yi CA, Kim TS, Kim H, Kim J, Han J, et al. CT scan features as predictors of patient outcome after bronchial intervention in endobronchial TB. Chest. 2010;138:380–385. doi: 10.1378/chest.09-1846. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Verma A, Park HY, Lim SY, Um SW, Koh WJ, Suh GY, et al. Posttuberculosis tracheobronchial stenosis: use of CT to optimize the time of silicone stent removal. Radiology. 2012;263:562–568. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11111463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Colt HG, Dumon JF. Airway stents. Present and future. Clin Chest Med. 1995;16:465–478. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Dumon JF. A dedicated tracheobronchial stent. Chest. 1990;97:328–332. doi: 10.1378/chest.97.2.328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kim HJ, Koh WJ, Suh GY, Chung MP, Kim JG, Suh SW, et al. The usefulness and safety of natural stent in a canine model of tracheal stenosis. Tuberc Respir Dis. 2002;53:431–438. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Ryu YJ, Kim H, Yu CM, Choi JC, Kwon YS, Kim J, et al. Comparison of natural and Dumon airway stents for the management of benign tracheobronchial stenoses. Respirology. 2006;11:748–754. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1843.2006.00955.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Wahidi MM, Ernst A. The Montgomery T-tube tracheal stent. Clin Chest Med. 2003;24:437–443. doi: 10.1016/s0272-5231(03)00042-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Carretta A, Casiraghi M, Melloni G, Bandiera A, Ciriaco P, Ferla L, et al. Montgomery T-tube placement in the treatment of benign tracheal lesions. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009;36:352–356. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2009.02.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Owens WD, Felts JA, Spitznagel EL., Jr ASA physical status classifications: a study of consistency of ratings. Anesthesiology. 1978;49:239–243. doi: 10.1097/00000542-197810000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Myer CM, 3rd, O’Connor DM, Cotton RT. Proposed grading system for subglottic stenosis based on endotracheal tube sizes. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994;103:319–323. doi: 10.1177/000348949410300410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Eom JS, Kim H, Park HY, Jeon K, Um SW, Koh WJ, et al. Timing of silicone stent removal in patients with post-tuberculosis bronchial stenosis. Ann Thorac Med. 2013;8:218–223. doi: 10.4103/1817-1737.118504. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Brichet A, Verkindre C, Dupont J, Carlier ML, Darras J, Wurtz A, et al. Multidisciplinary approach to management of postintubation tracheal stenoses. Eur Respir J. 1999;13:888–893. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3003.1999.13d32.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Martinez-Ballarin JI, Diaz-Jimenez JP, Castro MJ, Moya JA. Silicone stents in the management of benign tracheobronchial stenoses. Tolerance and early results in 63 patients. Chest. 1996;109:626–629. doi: 10.1378/chest.109.3.626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Cullen NK, Park YG, Bayley MT. Functional recovery following traumatic vs non-traumatic brain injury: a case-controlled study. Brain Inj. 2008;22:1013–1020. doi: 10.1080/02699050802530581. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Huang S, Xu J, An Z, Yuan P, Xu H, Lv W, et al. Clinical assessment of airway stent placement in patients with malignant airway lesions. J Thorac Dis. 2018;10:3277–3288. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.06.01. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Freitag L, Darwiche K. Endoscopic treatment of tracheal stenosis. Thorac Surg Clin. 2014;24:27–40. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2013.10.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Zias N, Chroneou A, Tabba MK, Gonzalez AV, Gray AW, Lamb CR, et al. Post tracheostomy and post intubation tracheal stenosis: report of 31 cases and review of the literature. BMC Pulm Med. 2008;8:18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-8-18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]