Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 104
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
2.
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
3.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 21(1): 28, 2021 01 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388729

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Routine preoperative methods to assess airway such as the interincisor distance (IID), Mallampati classification, and upper lip bite test (ULBT) have a certain risk of upper respiratory tract exposure and virus spread. Condyle-tragus maximal distance(C-TMD) can be used to assess the airway, and does not require the patient to expose the upper respiratory tract, but its value in predicting difficult laryngoscopy compared to other indicators (Mallampati classification, IID, and ULBT) remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to observe the value of C-TMD to predict difficult laryngoscopy and the influence on intubation time and intubation attempts, and provide a new idea for preoperative airway assessment during epidemic. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing general anesthesia and tracheal intubation were enrolled. IID, Mallampati classification, ULBT, and C-TMD of each patient were evaluated before the initiation of anesthesia. The primary outcome was intubation time. The secondary outcomes were difficult laryngoscopy defined as the Cormack-Lehane Level > grade 2 and the number of intubation attempts. RESULTS: Three hundred four patients were successfully enrolled and completed the study, 39 patients were identified as difficult laryngoscopy. The intubation time was shorter with the C-TMD>1 finger group 46.8 ± 7.3 s, compared with the C-TMD<1 finger group 50.8 ± 8.6 s (p<0.01). First attempt success rate was higher in the C-TMD>1 finger group 98.9% than in the C-TMD<1 finger group 87.1% (P<0.01). The correlation between the C-TMD and Cormack-Lehane Level was 0.317 (Spearman correlation coefficient, P<0.001), and the area under the ROC curve was 0.699 (P<0.01). The C-TMD < 1 finger width was the most consistent with difficult laryngoscopy (κ = 0.485;95%CI:0.286-0.612) and its OR value was 10.09 (95%CI: 4.19-24.28), sensitivity was 0.469 (95%CI: 0.325-0.617), specificity was 0.929 (95%CI: 0.877-0.964), positive predictive value was 0.676 (95%CI: 0.484-0.745), negative predictive value was 0.847 (95%CI: 0.825-0.865). CONCLUSION: Compared with the IID, Mallampati classification and ULBT, C-TMD has higher value in predicting difficult laryngoscopy and does not require the exposure of upper respiratory tract. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered on October 21, 2019 in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( ChiCTR1900026775 ).


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , Anesthesia, General/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Laryngoscopy/methods , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Predictive Value of Tests , Preoperative Care , Prospective Studies , Respiratory System/anatomy & histology , Sensitivity and Specificity
4.
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
5.
Emerg Med Australas ; 33(4): 728-733, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1255059

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: In response to COVID-19, we introduced and examined the effect of a raft of modifications to standard practice on adverse events and first-attempt success (FAS) associated with ED intubation. METHODS: An analysis of prospectively collected registry data of all ED intubations over a 3-year period at an Australian Major Trauma Centre. During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, we introduced modifications to standard practice to reduce the risk to staff including: aerosolisation reduction, comprehensive personal protective equipment for all intubations, regular low fidelity simulation with 'sign-off' for all medical and nursing staff, senior clinician laryngoscopist and the introduction of pre-drawn medications. RESULTS: There were 783 patients, 136 in the COVID-19 era and 647 in the pre-COVID-19 comparator group. The rate of hypoxia was higher during the COVID-19 era compared to pre-COVID-19 (18.4% vs 9.6%, P < 0.005). This occurred despite the FAS rate remaining very high (95.6% vs 93.8%, P = 0.42) and intubation being undertaken by more senior laryngoscopists (consultant 55.9% during COVID-19 vs 22.6% pre-COVID-19, P < 0.001). Other adverse events were similar before and during COVID-19 (hypotension 12.5% vs 7.9%, P = 0.082; bradycardia 1.5% vs 0.5%, P = 0.21). Video laryngoscopy was more likely to be used during COVID-19 (95.6% vs 82.5%, P < 0.001) and induction of anaesthesia more often used ketamine (66.9% vs 42.3%, P < 0.001) and rocuronium (86.8% vs 52.1%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This raft of modifications to ED intubation was associated with significant increase in hypoxia despite a very high FAS rate and more senior first laryngoscopist.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/standards , Adult , Aged , Airway Management/standards , Airway Management/statistics & numerical data , Australia , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy/adverse effects , Laryngoscopy/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Quality Improvement , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Acad Med ; 96(10): 1414-1418, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1185988

ABSTRACT

PROBLEM: The most effective way to train clinicians to safely don and doff personal protective equipment (PPE) and perform aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), such as intubations, is unknown when clinician educators are unavailable, as they have been during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proper PPE and airway management techniques are critical to prevent the transmission of respiratory illnesses such as COVID-19. APPROACH: In March 2020, the authors implemented a structured train-the-trainers curriculum to teach PPE techniques and a modified airway management algorithm for suspected COVID-19 patients. A single emergency medicine physician trainer taught 17 subsequent emergency medicine and critical care physician trainers the proper PPE and airway management techniques. The initial trainer and 7 of the subsequent trainers then instructed 99 other emergency medicine resident and attending physicians using in situ simulation. Trainers and learners completed retrospective pre-post surveys to assess their comfort teaching the material and performing the techniques, respectively. OUTCOMES: The surveys demonstrated a significant increase in the trainers' comfort in teaching simulation-based education, from 4.00 to 4.53 on a 5-point Likert scale (P < .005), and in teaching the airway management techniques through simulation, from 2.47 to 4.47 (P < .001). There was no difference in the change in comfort level between those learners who were taught by the initial trainer and those who were taught by the subsequent trainers. These results suggest that the subsequent trainers were as effective in teaching the simulation material as the initial trainer. NEXT STEPS: Work is ongoing to investigate clinician- and patient-specific outcomes, including PPE adherence, appropriate AGP performance, complication rate, and learners' skill retention. Future work will focus on implementing similar train-the-trainers strategies for other health professions, specialties, and high-risk or rare procedures.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Computer Simulation , Curriculum , Health Personnel/education , Personal Protective Equipment , Simulation Training/methods , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
8.
MedEdPORTAL ; 17: 11134, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1170589

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In a CICO (cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate) situation, anesthesiologists and acute care physicians must be able to perform an emergency surgical cricothyrotomy (front-of-neck airway procedure). CICOs are high-acuity situations with rare opportunities for safe practice. In COVID-19 airway management guidelines, bougie-assisted surgical cricothyrotomy is the recommended emergency strategy for CICO situations. Methods: We designed a 4-hour procedural simulation workshop on surgical cricothyrotomy to train 16 medical residents. We provided prerequisite readings, a lecture, and a videotaped demonstration. Two clinical scenarios introduced deliberate practice on partial-task neck simulators and fresh human cadavers. We segmented an evidence-based procedure and asked participants to verbalize the five steps of the procedure on multiple occasions. Results: Thirty-two residents who participated in the workshops were surveyed, with a 97% response rate (16 of 16 from anesthesiology, 15 of 16 from emergency medicine). Participants commented positively on the workshop's authenticity, its structure, the quality of the feedback provided, and its perceived impact on improving skills in surgical cricothyrotomy. We analyzed narrative comments related to three domains: preparation for the procedure, performing the procedure, and maintaining the skills. Participants highlighted the importance of performing the procedure many times and mentioned the representativeness of fresh cadavers. Discussion: We developed a surgical cricothyrotomy simulation workshop for anesthesiology and emergency medicine residents. Residents in the two specialities uniformly appreciated its format and content. We identified common pitfalls when executing the procedure and provided practical tips and material to facilitate implementation, in particular to face the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Anesthesiology/education , COVID-19/surgery , Emergency Medicine/education , Internship and Residency , Simulation Training , Tracheostomy/education , Adult , Airway Management/methods , Cadaver , Humans , Pandemics , Tracheostomy/methods
10.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 20(1): 232, 2020 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-757603

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The challenges posed by the spread of COVID-19 disease through aerosols have compelled anesthesiologists to modify their airway management practices. Devices such as barrier boxes are being considered as potential adjuncts to full PPE's to limit the aerosol spread. Usage of the barrier box raises concerns of delay in time to intubate (TTI). We designed our study to determine if using a barrier box with glidescope delays TTI within acceptable parameters to make relevant clinical conclusions. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients were enrolled in this prospective non-inferiority controlled trial and were randomly allocated to either group C (without the barrier box) or the study group BB (using barrier box). The primary measured endpoint is time to intubate (TTI), which is defined as time taken from loss of twitches confirmed with a peripheral nerve stimulator to confirmation of end-tidal CO 2. 15 s was used as non-inferiority margin for the purpose of the study. We used an unpaired two-sample single-sided t-test to test our non- inferiority hypothesis (H 0: Mean TTI diff ≥15 s, H A: Mean TTI diff < 15 s). Secondary endpoints include the number of attempts at intubation, lowest oxygen saturation during induction, and the need for bag-mask ventilation. RESULTS: Mean TTI in group C was 42 s (CI 19.2 to 64.8) vs. 52.1 s (CI 26.1 to 78) in group BB. The difference in mean TTI was 10.1 s (CI -∞ to 14.9). We rejected the null hypothesis and concluded with 95% confidence that the difference of the mean TTI between the groups is less than < 15 s (95% CI -∞ to 14.9,p = 0.0461). Our induction times were comparable (67.7 vs. 65.9 s).100% of our patients were intubated on the first attempt in both groups. None of our patients needed rescue breaths. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in patients with normal airway exam, scheduled for elective surgeries, our barrier box did not cause any clinically significant delay in TTI when airway manipulation is performed by well-trained providers. The study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04411056) on May 27, 2020.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , Anesthesiology/methods , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adult , Aerosols , Aged , Airway Management/instrumentation , Anesthesiologists/organization & administration , Anesthesiology/instrumentation , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/instrumentation , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Time Factors
13.
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
14.
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol ; 35(3): 461-475, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1103745

ABSTRACT

In 2019, a novel coronavirus called the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 led to the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019, which was deemed a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Owing to the accelerated rate of mortality and utilization of hospital resources, health care systems had to adapt to these major changes. This affected patient care across all disciplines and specifically within the perioperative services. In this review, we discuss the strategies and pitfalls of how perioperative services in a large academic medical center responded to the initial onset of a pandemic, adjustments made to airway management and anesthesia specialty services - including critical care medicine, obstetric anesthesiology, and cardiac anesthesiology - and strategies for reopening surgical caseload during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Clinical Decision-Making , Critical Care/standards , Patient Care/standards , Airway Management/methods , Clinical Decision-Making/methods , Critical Care/methods , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Care/methods
18.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol ; 278(1): 1-7, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064478

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, may need intensive care unit (ICU) admission in up to 12% of all positive cases for massive interstitial pneumonia, with possible long-term endotracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation and subsequent tracheostomy. The most common airway-related complications of such ICU maneuvers are laryngotracheal granulomas, webs, stenosis, malacia and, less commonly, tracheal necrosis with tracheo-esophageal or tracheo-arterial fistulae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This paper gathers the opinions of experts of the Laryngotracheal Stenosis Committee of the European Laryngological Society, with the aim of alerting the medical community about the possible rise in number of COVID-19-related laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS), and the aspiration of paving the way to a more rationale concentration of these cases within referral specialist airway centers. RESULTS: A range of prevention strategies, diagnostic work-up, and therapeutic approaches are reported and framed within the COVID-19 pandemic context. CONCLUSIONS: One of the most important roles of otolaryngologists when encountering airway-related signs and symptoms in patients with previous ICU hospitalization for COVID-19 is to maintain a high level of suspicion for LTS development, and share it with colleagues and other health care professionals. Such a condition requires specific expertise and should be comprehensively managed in tertiary referral centers.


Subject(s)
Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Laryngostenosis/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Tracheal Stenosis/epidemiology , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Male , Otolaryngologists , Otolaryngology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Societies, Medical , Tracheostomy/adverse effects
20.
Monaldi Arch Chest Dis ; 90(4)2020 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060455

ABSTRACT

The novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has distinct clinical manifestations that can vary from an asymptomatic condition to severe acute respiratory failure. Phenotypes are attributable to different pathophysiological mechanisms and require different treatment strategies. The assessment and identification of different phenotypes can guide therapy configurations such as oxygen therapy, non-invasive ventilation, airway management, and tracheal intubation. Further studies are essential to provide information on the influence of phenotypes in the decision of rehabilitation strategies. The sequelae left in the respiratory system of COVID-19 survivors and its limitations will be a challenge for rehabilitation services worldwide. Lung injuries are directly related to the phenotypes presented, and depending on the degree of these injuries, rehabilitation strategies can be targeted. We believe that differentiating patients, according to their respective phenotypes, can improve decision-making in treatment and individualized rehabilitation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/rehabilitation , Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine/methods , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Airway Management/methods , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19/virology , Clinical Decision-Making , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Phenotype , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/complications , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/virology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...