Awake vs Sedated Tracheostomies: A Review and Comparison at a Single Institution.

Objective: The literature surrounding awake tracheostomies is sparse, particularly comparing awake tracheostomy patients to that of the sedated tracheostomy population. This study sought to compare tracheostomy patient demographics, indications, and outcomes of the 2 populations.

Study Design: Case series with chart review.

Setting: Tertiary care center.

Materials And Methods: All tracheostomies performed at our tertiary academic medical institution between January 2013 through November 2015 were reviewed. The data collected included demographics, comorbidity, anticoagulation, and outcomes.

Results: A total of 978 tracheostomies performed during this period met inclusion criteria, with 78 (8.0%) on awake patients. Most awake procedures were performed by otolaryngology (97.4%). Male sex predominated (73.1% awake vs 57.8% sedated). Forty-four patients (56.4%) were smokers in the awake group vs 326 of 900 (36.2%) in the sedated group. Malignancy was the primary indication for awake tracheostomy (68/78, 87.1%). One patient (1.3%) had significant postoperative bleeding compared to 26 of 900 (2.9%) of the sedated tracheostomy patients ( P = .406). Only 9 (11.4%) were ever decannulated. Thirty-one (39.2%) patients ultimately underwent total laryngectomy, 3 could not be decannulated secondary to anatomical causes (stenosis or vocal fold paralysis), and 19 were lost to follow-up after discharge. There were 12 of 78 (15.4%) overall deaths in the awake cohort, with 215 of 900 (23.9%) in the sedated cohort ( P = .088).

Conclusion: Despite all the differences between the 2 patient populations, the urgent awake tracheostomy appears to be safe and its complications do not appear significantly different from the sedated population.