Admission avoidance in acute epistaxis: A prospective national audit during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To report changes in practice brought about by COVID-19 and the implementation of new guidelines, and to explore factors relating to unscheduled re-presentations for patients discharged from the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Prospective multicentre national audit over 12 weeks from 6th April 2020. SETTING: UK secondary care ENT departments. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with acute epistaxis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Re-presentation within 10 days for patients discharged from the ED. RESULTS: Eighty three centres from all four UK nations submitted 2631 valid cases. The majority of cases were ED referrals (89.7%, n = 2358/2631). 54.6% were discharged from the ED following ENT review (n = 1267/2322), of whom 19.5% re-presented within 10 days (n = 245/1259) and 6.8% were ultimately admitted (n = 86/1259). 46.7% of patients had a non-dissolvable pack inserted by ED prior to referral to ENT (n = 1099/2355). The discharge rates for ED patients and their subsequent re-presentation rates were as follows: non-dissolvable packs, 29.5% discharged (n = 332/1125), 18.2% re-presented (n = 60/330); dissolvable products, 71.1% discharged (n = 488/686), 21.8% re-presented (n = 106/486); cautery only, 89.2% discharged (n = 247/277), 20.0% re-presented (n = 49/245); and no intranasal intervention, 85.5% discharged (n = 200/234), 15.2% re-presented (n = 30/198). Univariable logistic regression showed that not being packed by ED, antiplatelet medications, failed cautery and recent epistaxis treatment were significant predictors of re-presentation within 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: Management of acute epistaxis was notably affected during the initial peak of the pandemic, with a shift towards reduced admissions. This national audit highlights that many patients who may previously have been admitted to hospital may be safely discharged from the ED following acute epistaxis.

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.

Coronavirus disease 2019: changing the future of emergency epistaxis management.

BACKGROUND: Acute epistaxis can be a life-threatening airway emergency, requiring in-patient admission. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic placed significant strain on hospital resources, and management has shifted towards an out-patient-centred approach. METHODS: A five-month single-centre retrospective study was undertaken of all epistaxis patients managed by the ENT department. A pre-coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group was managed with pre-existing guidelines, compared to new guidelines for the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group. A telephone survey was performed on out-patients with non-dissolvable packs to assess patient comfort and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were seen. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic group had significantly more patients aged over 65 years (p = 0.004), an increased use of absorbable dressings and local haemostatic agents (Nasopore and Surgiflo), and fewer admissions (all p < 0.0005). Rates of re-presentation and morbidity, and length of hospital stay were similar. The telephone survey revealed out-patient management to be efficacious and feasible. CONCLUSION: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has shifted epistaxis management towards local haemostatic agents and out-patient management; this approach is as safe and effective as previously well-established regimens.

The impact of frailty on epistaxis admission, a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Epistaxis is frequently managed with intra-nasal packing devices, traditionally requiring patient admission. Current COVID-19 guidelines encourage ambulatory care where possible in this patient cohort. This paper aims to establish the impact of the Clinical Frailty Scale, anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapeutics and season variation on pre-pandemic admissions to help identify patients suitable for ambulatory epistaxis management. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: Scottish Regional Health Board PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients attending secondary care with epistaxis between March 2019 and March 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Likelihood of epistaxis hospital admission based on Clinical Frailty Scale. RESULTS: 299 epistaxis presentations were identified, of which 122 (40.8%) required admission. Clinical Frailty Scale of ≥4 had an increased likelihood of admission (OR 3.15 (95% CI:1.94-5.16), P < .05). In the majority of presentations (66.2%), patients were taking either an antiplatelet or anticoagulant. Of these presentations, the use of an anticoagulant (OR: 2.00 (95% CI: 1.20-3.33), P < .05 and dual antiplatelet (OR: 2.82 (95% CI: 1.02-7.86), P < .05) demonstrated increased likelihood of admission. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that frailty increases the risk of admission in adult patients presenting with epistaxis. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) could be utilised in risk stratification to identify suitable patients for outpatient management. Patients with CFS ≤ 3 could be considered for outpatient management of their epistaxis. It is likely that patients with CFS ≥4 on anticoagulant or dual antiplatelet will require admission.

Ambulatory management of common ENT emergencies - what's the evidence?

OBJECTIVES: The global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 has necessitated changes to 'usual' ways of practice in otolaryngology, with a view towards out-patient or ambulatory management of appropriate conditions. This paper reviews the available evidence for out-patient management of three of the most common causes for emergency referral to the otolaryngology team: tonsillitis, peri-tonsillar abscess and epistaxis. METHODS: A literature review was performed, searching all available online databases and resources. The Medical Subject Headings 'tonsillitis', 'pharyngotonsillitis', 'quinsy', 'peritonsillar abscess' and 'epistaxis' were used. Papers discussing out-patient management were reviewed by the authors. RESULTS: Out-patient and ambulatory pathways for tonsillitis and peritonsillar abscess are well described for patients meeting appropriate criteria. Safe discharge of select patients is safe and should be encouraged in the current clinical climate. Safe discharge of patients with epistaxis who have bleeding controlled is also well described. CONCLUSION: In select cases, tonsillitis, quinsy and epistaxis patients can be safely managed out of hospital, with low re-admission rates.

Management of ENT emergencies during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 imposed dramatic changes on ENT service delivery. Pre-pandemic, such changes would have been considered potentially unsafe. This study outlines the impact of lockdown on the incidence and management of ENT emergencies at a large UK centre. METHODS: After modification of pre-pandemic guidelines, ENT emergency referrals data during the UK lockdown were prospectively captured. A comparative analysis was performed with retrospective data from a corresponding period in 2019. RESULTS: An overall reduction (p < 0.001) in emergency referrals (n = 119) and admissions (n = 18) occurred during the lockdown period compared to the 2019 period (432 referrals and 290 admissions). Specifically, there were reduced admission rates for epistaxis (p < 0.0001) and tonsillar infection (p < 0.005) in the lockdown period. During lockdown, 90 per cent of patients requiring non-dissolvable nasal packing were managed as out-patients. CONCLUSIONS: Coronavirus disease 2019 compelled modifications to pre-pandemic ENT guidelines. The enforced changes to emergency care appear to be safe and successfully adopted. Arguably, the measures have both economic and patient-related implications post-coronavirus disease 2019 and during future similar pandemics and lockdowns.

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.