A multicenter study to investigate the positive rate of SARS-CoV-2 in middle ear and mastoid specimens from otologic surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus, causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Otologic surgeries with drilling by powered instruments induce significant aerosols, which may induce SARS-CoV-2 transmission to medical staff if SARS-CoV-2 exists in the middle ear and mastoid cavity. During a COVID-19 pandemic, therefore, confirming a negative COVID-19 test prior to otologic surgery is recommended. However, previous coronavirus studies demonstrated that coronavirus was detected in the middle ear in some patients even though the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test using their nasopharyngeal swab was negative. This study aimed to elucidate the probability of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in the middle ear or mastoid specimens from otologic surgery patients in whom SARS-CoV-2 was not detected by preoperative PCR test using a nasopharyngeal swab. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter clinical study. Between April 2020 and December 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, 251 ears of the 228 participants who underwent otologic surgery were included in this study. All participants had no symptoms suggesting COVID-19 or close contact with a confirmed COVID-19 patient two weeks prior to the surgery. They were also negative in the SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests using a nasopharyngeal swab before surgery. We collected mucosa, granulation, bone dust with mucosa or fluid from the middle ear or mastoid for the SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests during each otologic surgery. RESULTS: The median age of the participants at surgery was 31.5 years old. Mastoidectomy using a powered instrument was conducted in 180 of 251 otologic surgeries (71.8%). According to intraoperative findings, active inflammation in the middle ear or mastoid cavities was evident in 20 otologic surgeries (8.0%), while minor inflammation was observed in 77 (30.7%). All SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests of otologic specimens showed a negative result. No patient suffered from COVID-19 within two months after otologic surgery. Furthermore, no hospital-acquired infections associated with otologic surgery occurred in our institutions CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that PCR testing did not detect SARS-CoV-2 in middle ear and mastoid specimens, suggesting that the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is not high in otologic surgeries even using powered instruments when both clinical and laboratory tests are confirmed to be negative for COVID-19.

A Step towards Achieving Sustainable Otologic Surgery in Low-Resource Settings: A Cost Comparison between Shipping an Otologic versus Microscopic Surgical Setup.

Background: The advancement of otologic surgery in low-resource settings has been limited by the cost and transport of surgical equipment. This study compared the transportation costs of an otologic microscopic surgical setup (MSS) versus an endoscopic surgical setup (ESS) in low- and low to middle-income countries (LMICs) for surgical teaching. Methods: Dimensions of microscopes, endoscopes and associated surgical instruments were used to calculate shipping costs from Minneapolis, MN, USA to Kenya, Haiti and Sri Lanka. Results: The average cost of internationally shipping the ESS is less than the MSS in Kenya (ESS: USD 1344.03; MSS: USD 20,947.00; p = 0.370), Haiti (ESS: USD 549.11; MSS: USD 1679.00; p < 0.05) and Sri Lanka (ESS: USD 945.38; MSS: USD 8490.57; p = 0.377). Freight shipping was required for the MSS while the ESS can be packed into an international checked bag for USD 35.00 USD. Discussion: The ESS has fewer logistical barriers than the MSS, making the endoscope a feasible option for surgical teaching in LMICs.

Analysis of aerosol production and aerosol dispersion during otologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: As a respiratory disease, the transmission of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is mainly caused by small droplets and aerosols. Healthcare personnel are particularly exposed during otologic surgery given the continuity with the nasopharynx, where the viral load is high, and the use of high-speed instruments. The purpose of the present study is to test a model of droplet dispersion produced in the performance of a drilling procedure on human bone to provide information about its distribution and size of the deposit in similar conditions to those of an operating theatre, to design different preventive measures. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A mastoidectomy and trans-labyrinthine approach were performed on an embalmed human corpse using for irrigation during drilling methylene blue dye in physiological saline solution (pss) at a concentration of 0.324 mg/mL. The distribution of the drops was stablished using semi-absorbent papers of size 52 cm × 42 cm covering the area around the dissection field to a radius of 150 cm and on the corpse at different heights to check vertical dispersion. The collected deposit material was analysed with the microscope at different magnification objectives. RESULTS: Droplets between 2 µm and 2.6 cm were obtained. The visualization of the coloured droplets in the horizontal plane at a magnification of 1.5 was detected at 150 cm from the focus of emission of milling particles. DISCUSSION: According to our study, bone drilling with high speed motors under continuous saline irrigation in a haemorrhagic surgical field increases the amount of aerosols exposing healthcare personnel to additional airbone particles. This risk does not end in the operating rooms as particles smaller than 2 µm can be suspended in the air for hours and could exit the operating theatre due to the use of positive pressure systems. Thus, the use of N95, FFP2, FFP3 or PAPRS should be considered and the development of hood systems to prevent the dispersion of aerosols during these procedures should be considered.

Aerosol generation during cadaveric simulation of otologic surgery and live cochlear implantation.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to healthcare workers through airborne aerosolization during otologic surgery has not been characterized. The objective of this study was to describe and quantify the aerosol generation during common otologic procedures in both cadaveric surgical simulation and live patient surgery. METHODS: The number concentrations of generated aerosols in the particle size range of 0.30 to 10.0 µm were quantified using an optical particle sizer during both a cadaveric simulation of routine otologic procedures as well as cochlear implant surgery on live patients in the operating room. RESULTS: In the cadaveric simulation, temporalis fascia graft harvest using cold techniques (without electrocautery) (n = 4) did not generate aerosols above baseline concentrations. Tympanoplasty (n = 3) and mastoidectomy (n = 3) both produced statistically significant increases in concentrations of aerosols (P < 0.05), predominantly submicron particles (< 1.0 µm). High-speed, powered drilling of the temporal bone during mastoidectomy with a Multi Flute cutting burr resulted in higher peak concentrations and greater number of spikes in aerosols than with a diamond burr. In the operating room, spikes in aerosols occurred during both cochlear implant surgeries. CONCLUSION: In the cadaveric simulation, temporalis fascia graft harvest without electrocautery did not generate aerosol levels above baseline, while significant aerosol levels were generated during mastoidectomy and to a much less degree during tympanoplasty. Aerosol spikes were appreciated during cochlear implantation surgery in live patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 Virus in the Middle Ear of Deceased COVID-19 Patients.

The presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the middle ear reveals the etiopathogenesis of otitis media in COVID-19, as well as an epidemiological risk during otologic examination and surgical procedures in COVID-19 patients. The study included 8 deceased patients with COVID-19. Tissue samples from the middle ear were subjected to virology, histopathology, scanning (SEM) and transmission (TEM) electron microscopy investigation. Ethmoidal mucosa samples were processed for virology analyses. qPCR resulted positive for 75% of nasal mucosa samples and 50% of middle ear samples. Ct values showed lower viral loads in middle ear samples. A proportion of 66.6% patients with positive results in the nasal mucosa showed positive results in the middle ear, and the subtype analysis of the complete genome sequences indicated B.1.1.7 lineage for all samples. In histopathological and SEM samples, no pathological aspects were identified. TEM revealed on the background of death critical alteration of cellular morphology, suggestive structures resembling SARS-CoV-2, goblet cells and immune cells. SARS-CoV-2 can be present in the middle ear of COVID-19 patients even if there is not clinical evidence of acute otitis media. Otolaryngologists could be particularly exposed to COVID-19 infection.