Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Anesth Analg ; 133(4): 876-890, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1412364

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), often results in severe hypoxemia requiring airway management. Because SARS-CoV-2 virus is spread via respiratory droplets, bag-mask ventilation, intubation, and extubation may place health care workers (HCW) at risk. While existing recommendations address airway management in patients with COVID-19, no guidance exists specifically for difficult airway management. Some strategies normally recommended for difficult airway management may not be ideal in the setting of COVID-19 infection. To address this issue, the Society for Airway Management (SAM) created a task force to review existing literature and current practice guidelines for difficult airway management by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. The SAM task force created recommendations for the management of known or suspected difficult airway in the setting of known or suspected COVID-19 infection. The goal of the task force was to optimize successful airway management while minimizing exposure risk. Each member conducted a literature review on specific clinical practice section utilizing standard search engines (PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar). Existing recommendations and evidence for difficult airway management in the COVID-19 context were developed. Each specific recommendation was discussed among task force members and modified until unanimously approved by all task force members. Elements of Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Reporting Checklist for dissemination of clinical practice guidelines were utilized to develop this statement. Airway management in the COVID-19 patient increases HCW exposure risk. Difficult airway management often takes longer and may involve multiple procedures with aerosolization potential, and strict adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols is mandatory to reduce risk to providers. When a patient's airway risk assessment suggests that awake tracheal intubation is an appropriate choice of technique, and procedures that may cause increased aerosolization of secretions should be avoided. Optimal preoxygenation before induction with a tight seal facemask may be performed to reduce the risk of hypoxemia. Unless the patient is experiencing oxygen desaturation, positive pressure bag-mask ventilation after induction may be avoided to reduce aerosolization. For optimal intubating conditions, patients should be anesthetized with full muscle relaxation. Videolaryngoscopy is recommended as a first-line strategy for airway management. If emergent invasive airway access is indicated, then we recommend a surgical technique such as scalpel-bougie-tube, rather than an aerosolizing generating procedure, such as transtracheal jet ventilation. This statement represents recommendations by the SAM task force for the difficult airway management of adults with COVID-19 with the goal to optimize successful airway management while minimizing the risk of clinician exposure.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/standards , Infection Control/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Societies, Medical/standards , Adult , Advisory Committees/standards , Airway Extubation/methods , Airway Extubation/standards , Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards
2.
Anaesthesia ; 76(12): 1577-1584, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1318625

ABSTRACT

Many guidelines consider supraglottic airway use to be an aerosol-generating procedure. This status requires increased levels of personal protective equipment, fallow time between cases and results in reduced operating theatre efficiency. Aerosol generation has never been quantitated during supraglottic airway use. To address this evidence gap, we conducted real-time aerosol monitoring (0.3-10-µm diameter) in ultraclean operating theatres during supraglottic airway insertion and removal. This showed very low background particle concentrations (median (IQR [range]) 1.6 (0-3.1 [0-4.0]) particles.l-1 ) against which the patient's tidal breathing produced a higher concentration of aerosol (4.0 (1.3-11.0 [0-44]) particles.l-1 , p = 0.048). The average aerosol concentration detected during supraglottic airway insertion (1.3 (1.0-4.2 [0-6.2]) particles.l-1 , n = 11), and removal (2.1 (0-17.5 [0-26.2]) particles.l-1 , n = 12) was no different to tidal breathing (p = 0.31 and p = 0.84, respectively). Comparison of supraglottic airway insertion and removal with a volitional cough (104 (66-169 [33-326]), n = 27), demonstrated that supraglottic airway insertion/removal sequences produced <4% of the aerosol compared with a single cough (p < 0.001). A transient aerosol increase was recorded during one complicated supraglottic airway insertion (which initially failed to provide a patent airway). Detailed analysis of this event showed an atypical particle size distribution and we subsequently identified multiple sources of non-respiratory aerosols that may be produced during airway management and can be considered as artefacts. These findings demonstrate supraglottic airway insertion/removal generates no more bio-aerosol than breathing and far less than a cough. This should inform the design of infection prevention strategies for anaesthetists and operating theatre staff caring for patients managed with supraglottic airways.


Subject(s)
Airway Extubation/standards , Environmental Monitoring/standards , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Operating Rooms/standards , Particle Size , Supraglottitis/therapy , Airway Extubation/methods , Airway Management/methods , Airway Management/standards , Cough/therapy , Environmental Monitoring/methods , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Operating Rooms/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Prospective Studies
4.
Anesth Analg ; 133(4): 876-890, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133644

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), often results in severe hypoxemia requiring airway management. Because SARS-CoV-2 virus is spread via respiratory droplets, bag-mask ventilation, intubation, and extubation may place health care workers (HCW) at risk. While existing recommendations address airway management in patients with COVID-19, no guidance exists specifically for difficult airway management. Some strategies normally recommended for difficult airway management may not be ideal in the setting of COVID-19 infection. To address this issue, the Society for Airway Management (SAM) created a task force to review existing literature and current practice guidelines for difficult airway management by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. The SAM task force created recommendations for the management of known or suspected difficult airway in the setting of known or suspected COVID-19 infection. The goal of the task force was to optimize successful airway management while minimizing exposure risk. Each member conducted a literature review on specific clinical practice section utilizing standard search engines (PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar). Existing recommendations and evidence for difficult airway management in the COVID-19 context were developed. Each specific recommendation was discussed among task force members and modified until unanimously approved by all task force members. Elements of Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Reporting Checklist for dissemination of clinical practice guidelines were utilized to develop this statement. Airway management in the COVID-19 patient increases HCW exposure risk. Difficult airway management often takes longer and may involve multiple procedures with aerosolization potential, and strict adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols is mandatory to reduce risk to providers. When a patient's airway risk assessment suggests that awake tracheal intubation is an appropriate choice of technique, and procedures that may cause increased aerosolization of secretions should be avoided. Optimal preoxygenation before induction with a tight seal facemask may be performed to reduce the risk of hypoxemia. Unless the patient is experiencing oxygen desaturation, positive pressure bag-mask ventilation after induction may be avoided to reduce aerosolization. For optimal intubating conditions, patients should be anesthetized with full muscle relaxation. Videolaryngoscopy is recommended as a first-line strategy for airway management. If emergent invasive airway access is indicated, then we recommend a surgical technique such as scalpel-bougie-tube, rather than an aerosolizing generating procedure, such as transtracheal jet ventilation. This statement represents recommendations by the SAM task force for the difficult airway management of adults with COVID-19 with the goal to optimize successful airway management while minimizing the risk of clinician exposure.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/standards , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/standards , Infection Control/standards , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Societies, Medical/standards , Adult , Advisory Committees/standards , Airway Extubation/methods , Airway Extubation/standards , Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards
6.
Anesth Analg ; 133(5): 1206-1214, 2021 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-846281

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prolonged times to tracheal extubation are those from end of surgery (dressing on the patient) to extubation 15 minutes or longer. They are so long that others in the operating room (OR) generally have exhausted whatever activities can be done. They cause delays in the starts of surgeons' to-follow cases and are associated with longer duration workdays. Anesthesiologists rate them as being inferior quality. We compare prolonged times to extubation between a teaching hospital in the United States with a phase I postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and a teaching hospital in Japan without a PACU. Our report is especially important during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Anesthesiologists with some patients undergoing general anesthetics and having initial PACU recovery in the ORs where they had surgery can learn from the Japanese anesthesiologists with all patients recovering in ORs. METHODS: The historical cohort study included all patients undergoing gynecological surgery at a US hospital (N = 785) or Japanese hospital (N = 699), with the time from OR entrance to end of surgery of at least 4 hours. RESULTS: The mean times from end of surgery to OR exit were slightly longer at the US hospital than at the Japanese hospital (mean difference 1.9 minutes, P < .0001). The mean from end of surgery to discharge to surgical ward at the US hospital also was longer (P < .0001), mean difference 2.2 hours. The sample standard deviations of times from end of surgery until tracheal extubation was 40 minutes for the US hospital versus 4 minutes at the Japanese hospital (P < .0001). Prolonged times to tracheal extubation were 39% of cases at the US hospital versus 6% at the Japanese hospital; relative risk 6.40, 99% confidence interval (CI), 4.28-9.56. Neither patient demographics, case characteristics, surgeon, anesthesiologist, nor anesthesia provider significantly revised the risk ratio. There were 39% of times to extubation that were prolonged among the patients receiving neither remifentanil nor desflurane (all such patients at the US hospital) versus 6% among the patients receiving both remifentanil and desflurane (all at the Japanese hospital). The relative risk 7.12 (99% CI, 4.59-11.05) was similar to that for the hospital groups. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in anesthetic practice can facilitate major differences in patient recovery soon after anesthesia, useful when the patient will recover initially in the OR or if the phase I PACU is expected to be unable to admit the patient.


Subject(s)
Airway Extubation/methods , Anesthesia Recovery Period , Hospital Units , Hospitals, Teaching/methods , Time-to-Treatment , Airway Extubation/standards , Cohort Studies , Hospital Units/standards , Hospitals, Teaching/standards , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Time-to-Treatment/standards , United States/epidemiology
8.
Anesth Analg ; 131(3): 677-689, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-543546

ABSTRACT

Current evidence suggests that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread occurs via respiratory droplets (particles >5 µm) and possibly through aerosol. The rate of transmission remains high during airway management. This was evident during the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome epidemic where those who were involved in tracheal intubation had a higher risk of infection than those who were not involved (odds ratio 6.6). We describe specific airway management principles for patients with known or suspected COVID-19 disease for an array of critical care and procedural settings. We conducted a thorough search of the available literature of airway management of COVID-19 across a variety of international settings. In addition, we have analyzed various medical professional body recommendations for common procedural practices such as interventional cardiology, gastroenterology, and pulmonology. A systematic process that aims to protect the operators involved via appropriate personal protective equipment, avoidance of unnecessary patient contact and minimalization of periprocedural aerosol generation are key components to successful airway management. For operating room cases requiring general anesthesia or complex interventional procedures, tracheal intubation should be the preferred option. For interventional procedures, when tracheal intubation is not indicated, cautious conscious sedation appears to be a reasonable approach. Awake intubation should be avoided unless it is absolutely necessary. Extubation is a high-risk procedure for aerosol and droplet spread and needs thorough planning and preparation. As updates and modifications in the management of COVID-19 are still evolving, local guidelines, appraised at regular intervals, are vital in optimizing clinical management.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Operating Rooms/methods , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adult , Airway Extubation/methods , Airway Extubation/standards , Airway Management/standards , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Operating Rooms/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL