Endoscopy mitigation strategy with telemedicine and low-cost device use for COVID-19 prevention: A fourth-level Colombian center experience.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The COVID-19 outbreak has reorganized surgical team conditions regarding endoscopy. The number of interventions has been reduced, the number of healthcare professionals must be limited, and both the patients and physicians are more protected than ever. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the highest peak of contagion in Colombia, endoscopy, colonoscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy were performed using a low-cost disposable device. A total of 1388 procedures were performed. Every patient was assessed for symptoms via a telephone call, at the health center, and after the procedure, following specific attention routes. RESULTS: After procedure follow-up, no positive cases of COVID-19 were noted. CONCLUSION: The methodology reduced the risk of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Heads-up Surgery: Endoscopes and Exoscopes for Otology and Neurotology in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

A new era of surgical visualization and magnification is poised to disrupt the field of otology and neurotology. The once revolutionary benefits of the binocular microscope now are shared with rigid endoscopes and exoscopes. These 2 modalities are complementary. The endoscope improves visualization of the hidden recesses through the external auditory canal or canal-up mastoidectomy. The exoscope provides an immersive visual experience and superior ergonomics compared with binocular microscopy. Endoscopes and exoscopes are poised to disrupt the standard of care for surgical visualization and magnification in otology and neurotology.

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.

COVID-19 Emergency Management: From the Reorganization of the Endoscopy Service to the Verification of the Reprocessing Efficacy.

Microbiological surveillance carried out in order to verify the effectiveness of endoscope reprocessing does not include the research of viruses, although endoscopes may be associated with the transmission of viral infections. This paper reports the experience of the University Hospital of Pisa in managing the risk from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during an endoscopy. A review of the reprocessing procedure was conducted to assess whether improvement actions were needed. To verify the reprocessing efficacy, a virological analysis was conducted both before and after the procedure. Five bronchoscopes and 11 digestive endoscopes (6 gastroscopes and 5 colonoscopes) were sampled. The liquid samples were subjected to concentration through the use of the Macrosep Advance Centrifugal Devices (PALL Life Sciences, Port Washington, NY, USA) and subsequently analyzed using the cobas® SARS-CoV-2 Test (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), together with eSwab 490 CE COPAN swabs (COPAN, Brescia, Italy), which were used to sample surfaces. In accordance with the first ordinance regarding the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency issued by the Tuscany Region in March 2020, a procedure dedicated to the management of the COVID-19 emergency in endoscopic practices was prepared, including the reprocessing of endoscopes. The virological analysis carried out on samples collected from endoscopes after reprocessing gave negative results, as well as on samples collected on the endoscopy column surfaces and the two washer-disinfectors that were dedicated to COVID-19 patients. The improvement in endoscope reprocessing implemented during the COVID-19 emergency was effective in ensuring the absence of SARS-CoV-2, thus reducing the risk of infections after an endoscopy on COVID-19 patients.

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.

The daily impact of COVID-19 in gastroenterology.

A new strain of coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2, emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, probably originating from a wild-animal contamination. Since then, the situation rapidly evolved from a cluster of patients with pneumonia, to a regional epidemic and now to a pandemic called COrona VIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). This evolution is related to the peculiar modes of transmission of the disease and to the globalization and lifestyle of the 21st century that created the perfect scenario for virus spread. Even though research has not evidenced particular susceptibility of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients to SARS-CoV-2 infection, immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory treatments were considered potential risk factors. In this context, initiating treatments with these agents should be cautiously weighted and regular ongoing treatments shall be continued, while the dose of corticosteroids should be reduced whenever possible. Due to the increased risk of contamination, elective endoscopic procedures and surgeries should be postponed and IBD online appointments shall be considered. IBD patients shall also follow the recommendations provided to the general population, such as minimization of contact with infected or suspected patients and to wash hands frequently. In the absence of effective treatments and vaccines, this pandemic can only be controlled through prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with the main objectives of providing patients the best healthcare possible and reduce mortality.

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.