ABSTRACT
As a respiratory pathogen, the novel coronavirus is commonly associated with aerosol-generating procedures. However, it is currently unclear whether spinal surgical procedures pose an additional risk of viral transmission to the surgical team. We reviewed the available evidence to ascertain the presence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) blood viremia and the virus' blood transmissibility, as well as evidence of blood-aerosol generation and operating room contamination from spinal surgical procedures. There is established evidence of COVID-19 blood viremia, a viral pathogenic cycle via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) receptors and similar blood transmission risk data from the SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome)/MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) era. Spinal surgical practices demonstrate significant blood-aerosol generation from the operative wound due to the use of common surgical instruments, such as electrocautery, as well as high-speed and high-impact devices. Based on the evidence, there is an established additional risk of viral transmission faced by surgical teams from blood-aerosols generated from the operative wound of COVID-19- infected patients via the inhalation of virus-laden aerosols and the subsequent initiation of the viral pathogenic cycle through binding with pulmonary ACE-2 receptors. Recognizing this additional risk amidst the ongoing pandemic serves as a caution to front-line surgical personnel to strictly adhere to personal protective equipment usage in operating rooms, to modify surgical techniques to reduce the hazard of surgical aerosol generation and COVID-19 viral exposure, and to consider it as an integral aspect of planning and adapting to the "new normal" operating practices.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: At the time of writing, we are all coping with the global COVID-19 pandemic. Amongst other things, this has had a significant impact on postponing virtually all routine clinic visits and elective surgeries. Concurrently, the Magnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) rod has been issued with a number of field safety notices and UK regulator medical device alerts. METHODS: This document serves to provide an overview of the current situation regarding the use of MAGEC rods, primarily in the UK, and the impact that the pandemic has had on the management of patients with these rods. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The care of each patient must of course be determined on an individual basis; however, the experience of the authors is that a short delay in scheduled distractions and clinic visits will not adversely impact patient treatment. The authors caution against a gap in distractions of longer than 6 months and emphasise the importance of continued remote patient monitoring to identify those who may need to be seen more urgently.