Use of Industrial Filters by Health Care Workers During Shortages of N95 Respirators in Pandemic Times.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a significant shortage of personal protective equipment in multiple health care facilities around the world, with the highest impact on N95 respirator masks. The N95 respirator is a mask that blocks at least 95% of very small (0.3 µm) particles and is considered a standard for enhanced respiratory precautions. The N95 mask shortage has created a need for other options for nasal and oral respiratory protection with similar filtration efficiency and "medical-grade" clearance, which can be used in health care settings. However, the literature around various filter types, their filtration capabilities, and the organizations certifying their use is dense, confusing, and not easily accessible to the public. Here, we synthesize relevant literature to analyze and disseminate information on (1) alternative viable filter options to N95s, (2) the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health certification process, (3) the relationship of National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health certification to Food and Drug Administration certification of filtration devices and surgical masks, and (4) how this relationship may affect future filtration usage in the medical community during a pandemic. Analysis of these standards is meant to inform regarding evidence of respirator efficacy but does not imply any official endorsement of these alternatives. With this article, we illuminate viable alternative respirator options during the COVID-19 pandemic to help alleviate the dependency on N95 face masks.

The Impact of Extended Delayed Surgery for Indolent Lung Cancer or Part-Solid Ground Glass Nodules.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with lung cancer may experience treatment delays. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of extended treatment delays on survival among patients with stage I typical bronchopulmonary carcinoid (BC), lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma (LPA) or invasive adenocarcinoma with a lepidic component (ADL). METHODS: Using National Cancer Database data (2004-2015), multivariable Cox regression analysis with penalized smoothing splines was performed to examine the association between treatment delay and all-cause mortality for stage I BC, LPA, and ADL. Propensity score-matched analyses compared the overall survival of patients who received "early" vs "delayed" surgery (ie, 0-30 vs 90-120 days after diagnosis) across the different histologic subtypes. RESULTS: During the study period, patients with stage I BC (n = 4947), LPA (n = 5340), and ADL (n = 6816) underwent surgery. Cox regression analysis of these cohorts showed a gradual steady increase in the hazard ratio the longer treatment is delayed. However, in propensity score-matched analyses that created cohorts of patients who underwent early and delayed surgery that were well-balanced in patient characteristics, no significant differences in 5-year survival were found between early and delayed surgery for stage I BC (87% [95% CI:77%-93%] vs 89% [95% CI: 80%-94%]), stage I LPA (73% [95% CI: 64%-80%] vs 77% [95% CI: 68%-83%]), and stage I ADL (71% [95% CI: 64%-76%] vs 69% [95% CI: 60%-76%]). CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, for early-stage indolent lung tumors and part-solid ground glass lung nodules, a delay of surgery by 3-4 months after diagnosis can be considered.

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy Versus Delayed Surgery for Early-stage Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the overall survival of patients with operable stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who undergo "early" SBRT (within 0-30 days after diagnosis) versus "delayed" surgery (90-120 days after diagnosis). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: During the COVID-19 pandemic, national guidelines have recommended patients with operable stage IA NSCLC to consider delaying surgery by at least 3 months or, alternatively, to undergo SBRT without delay. It is unknown which strategy is associated with better short- and long-term outcomes. METHODS: Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling and propensity score-matched analysis was used to compare the overall survival of patients with stage IA NSCLC in the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2015 who underwent "early" SBRT (0-30 days after diagnosis) versus that of patients who underwent "delayed" wedge resection (90-120 days after diagnosis). RESULTS: During the study period, 570 (55%) patients underwent early SBRT and 475 (45%) underwent delayed wedge resection. In multivariable analysis, delayed resection was associated with improved survival [adjusted hazard ratio 0.61; (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.76)]. Propensity-score matching was used to create 2 groups of 279 patients each who received early SBRT or delayed resection that were well-matched with regard to baseline characteristics. The 5-year survival associated with delayed resection was 53% (95% CI: 45%-61%) which was better than the 5-year survival associated with early SBRT (31% [95% CI: 24%-37%]). CONCLUSION: In this national analysis, for patients with stage IA NSCLC, extended delay of surgery was associated with improved survival when compared to early treatment with SBRT.