Impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia: epidemiological and clinical data from the comprehensive Italian retrospective multicenter study.

Rare Disease patients manifested high concern regarding the possible increased risk of severe outcomes and worsening of disease-specific clinical manifestation due to the impact of COVID-19. Our aim was to assess the prevalence, outcomes, and impact of COVID-19 in patients with a rare disease such as Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) in Italian population. A nationwide, multicentric, cross-sectional observational study was conducted on patients with HHT from five Italian HHT centers by online survey. The association between COVID-19-related signs and symptoms and nosebleeds worsening, the impact of personal protective equipment on nosebleeds pattern, and the relationship between the presence of visceral AVMs and severe outcomes were analyzed. Out of 605 total survey responses and eligible for analysis, 107 cases of COVID-19 were reported. A mild-course COVID-19 disease, not requiring hospitalization, was observed in 90.7% of patients, while the remaining eight cases needed hospitalization, two of them requiring intensive-care access. No fatal outcome was recorded and 79.3% of patients reported a complete recovery. No difference in infection risk and outcome between HHT patients and general population was evidenced. No significative interference of COVID-19 on HHT-related bleeding was found. The majority of patients received COVID-19 vaccination, with relevant impact on symptoms and need for hospitalization in case of infection. COVID-19 in HHT patients had an infection profile similar to the general population. COVID-19 course and outcome were independent from any specific HHT-related clinical features. Moreover, COVID-19 and anti-SARS-CoV-2 measures did not seem to affect significantly HHT-related bleeding profile.

Providing Evidence for Dogma: Risk of Epistaxis After COVID-19 Nasal-Screening Swab.

OBJECTIVE: There is anecdotal evidence SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) RT-PCR screening nasal swabs confer an elevated epistaxis risk. We aimed to assess the association between epistaxis and exposure to a COVID nasal swab. STUDY DESIGN: A matched pairs design was used. SETTING: The study was performed in a single, integrated health care system. METHODS: All patients who received a single COVID nasal swab at our institution between April 2020 and March 2021 were included. McNemar's test was used to compare rates of epistaxis between the 7 days following the index COVID swab (hazard period), and the 7 days preceding the index COVID swab (control period). Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical risk factors for epistaxis. RESULTS: A total of 827,987 participants were included, with 1047 epistaxis encounters. The prevalence of epistaxis during the hazard and control periods were 0.08% and 0.04%, respectively. Swab exposure was associated with 1.92-fold odds of epistaxis during the hazard period (95% confidence interval [1.73, 2.12]). Older age, Asian/Pacific Islander (PI) (compared to white), male sex, hypertension, prior facial trauma, and warfarin or direct-acting oral anticoagulant use were also associated with significantly increased odds of epistaxis (p ≦ 0.01). CONCLUSION: COVID nasal swabs are associated with increased odds of epistaxis. Physicians should counsel patients, particularly those at the highest risk, including a history of prior facial trauma, anticoagulants/antiplatelets, or hypertension.

Management of epistaxis in hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) patients using pulsed dye laser and the effect of withholding treatment during the COVID pandemic.

Using a patient survey, pulsed dye laser (PDL) treatment of epistaxis for hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) patients was evaluated after initial referral. Subsequently, due to the COVID pandemic, a natural experimental set-up allowed assessment of an enforced withdrawal of treatment. A total of 34 subjects were identified as undergoing PDL for HHT-related epistaxis. They were surveyed to look at the effectiveness of PDL treatment after initial referral and at the effect of delay to treatment during COVID on epistaxis and the associated quality of life. The survey also examined the comparison to other available treatments. Retrospective pre-COVID Epistaxis Severity Scores (ESS) were compared to post-COVID data to assess the effect of treatment withdrawal. The patients were then followed up after resumption of their treatment to assess the ensuing change in ESS. After initial referral, frequency and severity of epistaxis decreased. Fifty-six percent of patients experienced several bleeds per day before treatment, compared to 12% after. 88% of patients had episodes of epistaxis longer than 5 min, which was halved to 44% after treatment. Average ESS pre-COVID was 4.42 compared to 5.43 post-COVID delay, with a significant statistical difference (p = 0.02). On resumption of treatment, average ESS reduced to below pre-COVID levels at 4.39 after only 2 sessions. Seventy-six percent of patients found that withdrawal of PDL during COVID diminished their quality of life. PDL treatment of nasal mucosal telangiectasia reduces the frequency and duration of epistaxis. The ESS is reduced following treatment with PDL and quality of life subjectively improved.

Complete robotic intervention for acute epistaxis in a patient with COVID-19 pneumonia: technical considerations and device selection tips.

The use of robot-assisted technology is expanding in interventional laboratories with an increasing number of reports of effective treatment delivery in neurointerventional procedures. Here we report the feasibility of complete robot-assisted neurointervention including the guide catheter and microcatheter manipulations with subsequent embolization of the arterial source of hemorrhage in a patient hospitalized with severe COVID-19 complicated by acute epistaxis.

Management of epistaxis: a guide for junior doctors.

Epistaxis is commonly seen as an acute presentation to the emergency department. The level of severity can range from a minor ooze to a life-threatening bleed. The initial management is often the responsibility of junior doctors working in otolaryngology or the emergency department, so they must be familiar with the initial steps in treating this often distressing condition. The COVID-19 pandemic has complicated matters further as much of the management takes place in the upper airway. This article outlines the key considerations in the management of epistaxis, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection in HHT patients: nasopharyngeal versus oropharyngeal swab.

On March 11, 2020, WHO has defined the novel coronavirus disease SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak as a pandemic that still today continues to affect much of the world. Among the reasons for the rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there is the role of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic carriers. Therefore diagnostic testing is central to contain the global pandemic. Up to now real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-based molecular assays for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory specimens is the current reference standard for COVID-19 diagnosis. Based on current knowledge regarding the sensitivity of the molecular test, the highest positive detection rate is from lower respiratory tract specimens; alternatively it is possible to perform a nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab. Nasopharyngeal swab is the preferred choice for SARS-CoV-2 testing since it seems to have a greater sensitivity; however the procedure is not always free of complications and an epistaxis can occur. Among patients with greatest risk of massive nosebleed there are HHT patients. Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is an autosomal dominant disease that leads to multiregional mucocutanous telangiectases and visceral arteriovenous malformations. Clinically, the presence of telangiectases in nasal mucosa is the cause of recurrent epistaxis. In HHT patients the execution of the nasopharyngeal swab can determine from little or no consequences to a massive epistaxis leading to the necessity of nasal packing generally followed by hospital admission. In HHT patients undergoing a diagnostic test to evaluate the SARS-CoV-2 infection status, especially in those patients with frequent epistaxis with a history of anemia and repeated hospitalizations, it is therefore advisable to perform an oropharyngeal swab. This, compared to the nasopharyngeal swab, exposes to a lower risk of severe nosebleeds related treatments, such as blood transfusions or invasive procedures. According to the risk-benefit assessment and based on our experience, we consider that, despite a lower diagnostic sensitivity, oropharyngeal swab is preferable to nasopharyngeal swab for the diagnosis of SARS CoV-2 infection in patients with HHT.

Clinical Recommendations for Epistaxis Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Epistaxis is a common complaint in the general population, and its treatment is a common procedure in emergency departments. In the COVID-19 era, procedures involving airway management are a particular risk for health care workers due to the high virulence of the virus, the transmission through aerosol, and the risk of contagion from asymptomatic patients. In this article, we propose a simple memorandum of clinical recommendations to minimize the risk of operator infection deriving from epistaxis management. The correct use of personal protective equipment and strict compliance with the behavioral guidelines are essential to reduce the potential risk of infection. In particular, the use of filtering masks is strongly recommended since all patients, including those referring for epistaxis, should be treated as being COVID-19 positive in the emergency department. The safety of health care workers is essential not only to safeguard continuous patient care but also to limit virus transmission.