Treatment outcomes in patients with laryngotracheal lesions and compromised airway during and prior to the coronovirus disease 2019 pandemic: a tertiary institution's experience.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare treatment outcomes in patients with laryngeal and tracheal stenosis treated during and prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic period. METHOD: Patients treated for laryngotracheal lesions with impending airway compromise during the active pandemic period were matched with those treated for similar lesions in the preceding years in a monocentric tertiary hospital setting. RESULTS: During the pandemic period of 55 days, 31 patients underwent 47 procedures. Seven patients (2 children, 5 adults) had open airway surgery, and one had an operation-specific complication. Twenty-four patients (10 children, 14 adults) underwent 40 endoscopic interventions without any complications. Operation specific results during and prior to the pandemic were comparable. CONCLUSION: The management strategy in patients with laryngotracheal lesions and impending airway compromise should not be altered during periods of risk from coronavirus disease 2019. Avoiding a tracheostomy by performing primary corrective surgery or proceeding with a definitive decannulation would be beneficial in these patients to reduce the risk of contagion.

A novel mask to prevent aerosolized droplet dispersion in endoscopic procedures during the coronavirus disease pandemic.

ABSTRACT: Endoscopic procedures increase the risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to medical staff, because aerosols are generated during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. There have been several reported studies on devices for infection prevention; however, few reports have validated them. Therefore, we developed a novel mask to prevent the diffusion of aerosol droplets from patients undergoing endoscopy.We compared microdroplet dispersion during coughing episodes when using the novel mask with microdroplet dispersion when using the conventional mouthpiece alone.The mean number of microdroplets was significantly smaller in the group that used the novel mask (57.9 ±â€Š122.91 vs 933.6 ±â€Š119.80 droplets; P = .01).The novel mask may aid in reducing the degree of exposure of medical personnel to microdroplets and the risk of subsequent infection.

Aerosol and Droplet Risk of Common Otolaryngology Clinic Procedures.

OBJECTIVES: Define aerosol and droplet risks associated with routine otolaryngology clinic procedures during the COVID-19 era. METHODS: Clinical procedures were simulated in cadaveric heads whose oral and nasal cavities were coated with fluorescent tracer (vitamin B2) and breathing was manually simulated through retrograde intubation. A cascade impactor placed adjacent to the nares collected generated particles with aerodynamic diameters ≤14.1 µm. The 3D printed models and syringes were used to simulate middle and external ear suctioning as well as open suctioning, respectively. Provider's personal protective equipment (PPE) and procedural field contamination were also recorded for all trials using vitamin B2 fluorescent tracer. RESULTS: The positive controls of nebulized vitamin B2 produced aerosol particles ≤3.30 µm and endonasal drilling of a 3D model generated particles ≤14.1 µm. As compared with positive controls, aerosols and small droplets with aerodynamic diameter ≤14.1 µm were not detected during rigid nasal endoscopy, flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy, and rigid nasal suction of cadavers with simulated breathing. There was minimal to no field contamination in all 3 scenarios. Middle and external ear suctioning and open container suctioning did not result in any detectable droplet contamination. The clinic suction unit contained all fluorescent material without surrounding environmental contamination. CONCLUSION: While patients' coughing and sneezing may create a baseline risk for providers, this study demonstrates that nasal endoscopy, flexible laryngoscopy, and suctioning inherently do not pose an additional risk in terms of aerosol and small droplet generation. An overarching generalization cannot be made about endoscopy or suctioning being an aerosol generating procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Risk of disease transmission from flexible nasoendoscopy during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have emerged regarding infection transmission during flexible nasoendoscopy. METHODS: Information was gathered prospectively on flexible nasoendoscopy procedures performed between March and June 2020. Patients and healthcare workers were followed up to assess for coronavirus disease 2019 development. One-sided 97.5 per cent Poisson confidence intervals were calculated for upper limits of risk where zero events were observed. RESULTS: A total of 286 patients were recruited. The most common indication for flexible nasoendoscopy was investigation of 'red flag' symptoms (67 per cent). Forty-seven patients (16 per cent, 95 per cent confidence interval = 13-21 per cent) had suspicious findings on flexible nasoendoscopy requiring further investigation. Twenty patients (7.1 per cent, 95 per cent confidence interval = 4.4-11 per cent) had new cancer diagnoses. Zero coronavirus disease 2019 infections were recorded in the 273 patients. No. 27 endoscopists (the doctors and nurses who carried out the procedures) were followed up.The risk of developing coronavirus disease 2019 after flexible nasoendoscopy was determined to be 0-1.3 per cent. CONCLUSION: The risk of coronavirus disease 2019 transmission associated with performing flexible nasoendoscopy in asymptomatic patients, while using appropriate personal protective equipment, is very low. Additional data are required to confirm these findings in the setting of further disease surges.

Aerosolisation in endonasal endoscopic pituitary surgery.

PURPOSE: To determine the particle size, concentration, airborne duration and spread during endoscopic endonasal pituitary surgery in actual patients in a theatre setting. METHODS: This observational study recruited a convenience sample of three patients. Procedures were performed in a positive pressure operating room. Particle image velocimetry and spectrometry with air sampling were used for aerosol detection. RESULTS: Intubation and extubation generated small particles (< 5 µm) in mean concentrations 12 times greater than background noise (p < 0.001). The mean particle concentrations during endonasal access were 4.5 times greater than background (p = 0.01). Particles were typically large (> 75 µm), remained airborne for up to 10 s and travelled up to 1.1 m. Use of a microdebrider generated mean aerosol concentrations 18 times above baseline (p = 0.005). High-speed drilling did not produce aerosols greater than baseline. Pituitary tumour resection generated mean aerosol concentrations less than background (p = 0.18). Surgical drape removal generated small and large particles in mean concentrations 6.4 times greater than background (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Intubation and extubation generate large amounts of small particles that remain suspended in air for long durations and disperse through theatre. Endonasal access and pituitary tumour resection generate smaller concentrations of larger particles which are airborne for shorter periods and travel shorter distances.

Quantification and Comparison of Droplet Formation During Endoscopic and Microscopic Ear Surgery: A Cadaveric Model.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic and the disproportional spread of the disease among otorhinolaryngologists raised concerns regarding the safety of health care staff. Therefore, a quantitative risk assessment for otologic surgery would be desirable. This study aims to quantitatively compare the risk of perioperative droplet formation between microscopic and endoscopic approaches. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental research. SETTING: Temporal bone laboratory. METHODS: The middle ear of whole head specimens was injected with fluorescein (0.2 mg/10 mL) before endoscopic and microscopic epitympanectomy and mastoidectomy. Fluorescent droplet deposition on the surgical table was recorded under ultraviolet light, quantified, and compared among the interventions. Drilling time, droplet proportion, fluorescein intensity, and droplet size were assessed for every procedure. RESULTS: A total of 12 procedures were performed: 4 endoscopic epitympanectomies, 4 microscopic epitympanectomies, and 4 mastoidectomies. The mean (SD) proportion of fluorescein droplets was 0.14‰ (0.10‰) for endoscopic epitympanectomy and 0.64‰ (0.31‰) for microscopic epitympanectomy. During mastoidectomy, the deposition of droplets was 8.77‰ (6.71‰). Statistical comparison based on a mixed effects model revealed a significant increase (0.50‰) in droplet deposition during microscopic epitympanectomy as compared with endoscopic epitympanectomy (95% CI, 0.16‰ to 0.84‰). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable droplet generation during otologic surgery, and this represents a risk for the spread of airborne infectious diseases. The endoscopic technique offers the lowest risk of droplet formation as compared with microscopic approaches, with a significant 4.5-fold reduction of droplets between endoscopic and microscopic epitympanectomy and a 62-fold reduction between endoscopic epitympanectomy and cortical mastoidectomy.

Quantification of Aerosol Concentrations During Endonasal Instrumentation in the Clinic Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Recent anecdotal reports and cadaveric simulations have described aerosol generation during endonasal instrumentation, highlighting a possible risk for transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during endoscopic endonasal instrumentation. This study aims to provide a greater understanding of particle generation and exposure risk during endoscopic endonasal instrumentation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective quantification of aerosol generation during office-based nasal endoscopy procedures. METHODS: Using an optical particle sizer, airborne particles concentrations 0.3 to 10 microns in diameter, were measured during 30 nasal endoscopies in the clinic setting. Measurements were taken at time points throughout diagnostic and debridement endoscopies and compared to preprocedure and empty room particle concentrations. RESULTS: No significant change in airborne particle concentrations was measured during diagnostic nasal endoscopies in patients without the need for debridement. However, significant increases in mean particle concentration compared to preprocedure levels were measured during cold instrumentation at 2,462 particles/foot3 (95% CI 837 to 4,088; P = .005) and during suction use at 2,973 particle/foot3 (95% CI 1,419 to 4,529; P = .001). In total, 99.2% of all measured particles were ≤1 µm in diameter. CONCLUSION: When measured with an optical particle sizer, diagnostic nasal endoscopy with a rigid endoscope is not associated with increased particle aerosolization in patient for whom sinonasal debridement is not needed. In patients needing sinonasal debridement, endonasal cold and suction instrumentation were associated with increased particle aerosolization, with a trend observed during endoscope use prior to tissue manipulation. Endonasal debridement may potentially pose a higher risk for aerosolization and SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Appropriate personal protective equipment use and patient screening are recommended for all office-based endonasal procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:E1415-E1421, 2021.

Applications of Office-Based 445 nm Blue Laser Transnasal Flexible Laser Surgery: A Case Series and Review of Practice.

BACKGROUND: The recent introduction of 445 nm blue laser to office-based laryngology presents potential advantages. These include a desirable combination of cutting and photoangiolytic qualities and a lightweight, shock-resistant design. Despite its increasing use, current evidence is limited to experimental data and case reports. OBJECTIVES: The authors present a case series and overview of office blue laser transnasal flexible laser surgery (TNFLS), considering indications, patient selection, safety, technique, and surgical outcomes. We also review the safety and relevance of TNFLS to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. METHODS: Retrospective case series and narrative review. Our primary outcome measure was preoperative and postoperative Voice Handicap Index (VHI-10) score. Complications were documented by nature and severity. RESULTS: Thirty-six cases of office blue laser TNFLS were performed. A statistically significant improvement in VHI-10 score was demonstrated in cases of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP) and benign laryngeal lesions causing dysphonia (P < 0.01 and 0.045). Blue laser also proved effective in assisting office biopsy procedures. A minor and self-limiting complication was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Office blue laser TNFLS is safe and effective in the treatment of RRP and a range of benign laryngeal lesions. Future research should compare the efficacy and safety of blue laser with potassium titanyl phosphate laser in office-based treatment of these conditions. Further assessment of the cutting qualities of blue laser, initially in the theater environment, is necessary to refine our understanding of future applications.

Reducing potential aerosol generation in flexible nasolaryngoscopy: a novel method.

BACKGROUND: Fibre-optic nasoendoscopy and fibre-optic laryngoscopy are high-risk procedures in the coronavirus disease 2019 era, as they are potential aerosol-generating procedures. Barrier protection remains key to preventing transmission. METHODS: A device was developed that patients can wear to reduce potential aerosol contamination of the surroundings. CONCLUSION: This device is simple, reproducible, easy to use, economical and well-tolerated. Full personal protection equipment should additionally be worn by the operator.

SAGES and EAES recommendations for minimally invasive surgery during COVID-19 pandemic.

The unprecedented pandemic of COVID-19 has impacted many lives and affects the whole healthcare systems globally. In addition to the considerable workload challenges, surgeons are faced with a number of uncertainties regarding their own safety, practice, and overall patient care. This guide has been drafted at short notice to advise on specific issues related to surgical service provision and the safety of minimally invasive surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although laparoscopy can theoretically lead to aerosolization of blood borne viruses, there is no evidence available to confirm this is the case with COVID-19. The ultimate decision on the approach should be made after considering the proven benefits of laparoscopic techniques versus the potential theoretical risks of aerosolization. Nevertheless, erring on the side of safety would warrant treating the coronavirus as exhibiting similar aerosolization properties and all members of the OR staff should use personal protective equipment (PPE) in all surgical procedures during the pandemic regardless of known or suspected COVID status. Pneumoperitoneum should be safely evacuated via a filtration system before closure, trocar removal, specimen extraction, or conversion to open. All emergent endoscopic procedures performed during the pandemic should be considered as high risk and PPE must be used by all endoscopy staff.

Endonasal instrumentation and aerosolization risk in the era of COVID-19: simulation, literature review, and proposed mitigation strategies.

BACKGROUND: International experience with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) suggests it poses a significant risk of infectious transmission to skull base surgeons, due to high nasal viral titers and the unknown potential for aerosol generation during endonasal instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to simulate aerosolization events over a range of endoscopic procedures to obtain an evidence-based aerosol risk assessment. METHODS: Aerosolization was simulated in a cadaver using fluorescein solution (0.2 mg per 10 mL) and quantified using a blue-light filter and digital image processing. Outpatient sneezing during endoscopy was simulated using an intranasal atomizer in the presence or absence of intact and modified surgical mask barriers. Surgical aerosolization was simulated during nonpowered instrumentation, suction microdebrider, and high-speed drilling after nasal fluorescein application. RESULTS: Among the outpatient conditions, a simulated sneeze event generated maximal aerosol distribution at 30 cm, extending to 66 cm. Both an intact surgical mask and a modified VENT mask (which enables endoscopy) eliminated all detectable aerosol spread. Among the surgical conditions, cold instrumentation and microdebrider use did not generate detectable aerosols. Conversely, use of a high-speed drill produced significant aerosol contamination in all conditions tested. CONCLUSION: We confirm that aerosolization presents a risk to the endonasal skull base surgeon. In the outpatient setting, use of a barrier significantly reduces aerosol spread. Cold surgical instrumentation and microdebrider use pose significantly less aerosolization risk than a high-speed drill. Procedures requiring drill use should carry a special designation as an "aerosol-generating surgery" to convey this unique risk, and this supports the need for protective personal protective equipment.