Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1392-1396, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384168

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 pandemic continues to produce a large number of patients with chronic respiratory failure and ventilator dependence. As such, surgeons will be called upon to perform tracheotomy for a subset of these chronically intubated patients. As seen during the SARS and the SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, aerosol-generating procedures (AGP) have been associated with higher rates of infection of medical personnel and potential acceleration of viral dissemination throughout the medical center. Therefore, a thoughtful approach to tracheotomy (and other AGPs) is imperative and maintaining traditional management norms may be unsuitable or even potentially harmful. We sought to review the existing evidence informing best practices and then develop straightforward guidelines for tracheotomy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This communication is the product of those efforts and is based on national and international experience with the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the SARS epidemic of 2002/2003.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality/trends , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy , Tracheotomy/methods , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Critical Care/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Emergencies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Internationality , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Occupational Health , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Risk Assessment , SARS Virus/pathogenicity , Survival Rate , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Ventilator Weaning/methods
2.
Cureus ; 13(3): e13908, 2021 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1178562

ABSTRACT

We present the first-ever reported case of massive epistaxis following nasopharyngeal (NP) swabbing requiring intubation and tracheostomy. A 67-year-old male with a mechanical aortic valve on warfarin presented from a nursing home to the emergency department with hypoxia. NP swab for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was obtained, immediately followed by significant epistaxis. Patient desaturated to low 80s requiring intubation for airway protection and hypoxemic respiratory failure. Anterior nasal packing was performed. The COVID-19 test resulted negative. Extubation was unsuccessful on days four and nine. The patient subsequently underwent tracheostomy and percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. The patient was transferred to sub-acute rehabilitation with a tracheostomy tube on minimal ventilator support. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended obtaining an NP swab in COVID-19 suspects to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR).A study found that NP swabbing was associated with epistaxis in approximately 5-10% of the cases. Nursing home populations are at higher risk for COVID-19 and also reported to have increased use of oral anticoagulation for chronic atrial fibrillation with other co-morbidities (high CHADVASc score) which may increase bleeding risk with NP swabbing. Less invasive methods such as salivary and mid-turbinate sampling, nasal swab or saliva can be a better alternative sample for detecting SARS-CoV-2 as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and suggested by FDA. Positive PCR testing beyond nine days of illness is likely due to persistent dead virus particles and thus repeat testing is not suggested. Obtaining a history of bleeding diathesis, use of oral anticoagulants and consideration of NP anatomy is advised before swabbing. This case report raises the concern against inadvertent NP swabbing in cases with a low pretest probability of COVID-19 infection with higher bleeding risk.

3.
Surg Technol Int ; 38: 47-51, 2021 05 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1044979

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has affected millions across the world. Significant patient surges have caused severe resource allocation challenges in personal protective equipment, medications, and staffing. The virus produces bilateral lung infiltrates causing significant oxygen depletion and respiratory failure thus increasing the need for ventilators. The patients who require ventilation are often requiring prolonged ventilation and depleting hospital resources. Tracheostomy is often utilized in patients requiring prolonged ventilation, and early tracheostomy in critical care patients has been shown in some studies to improve a variety of factors including intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, ventilation weaning, and decreased sedation medication utilization. In a patient surge setting, as long as adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) is available to minimize spread to healthcare workers, early tracheostomy may be a beneficial management of these patients. Decreasing sedative medication utilization may help prevent shortages in future waves of infection and improve patient-provider communication as patients are more alert. Tracheostomy care is easier than endotracheal intubation and may have decreased viral aerosolization risk, particularly if repeat intubation is necessary after a weaning trial. Additionally, tracheostomy patients can be monitored with less staff, decreasing total healthcare worker exposure to infection. To manage risk of exposure, coordination of ventilation controlled by an anesthesiologist or a critical care physician with a surgeon during the procedure can minimize aerosolization to the team. Risk management and resource allocation is of the utmost importance in any global crisis and procedures must be appropriately planned and benefits to patients, as well as minimized exposure to healthcare providers, must be considered. Early tracheostomy could be a beneficial procedure for severe SARS-CoV-2 patients to minimize long-term virus aerosolization and exposure for healthcare workers while decreasing sedation, allowing for earlier transfer out of the ICU, and improving hospital resource utilization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Hospitals , Humans , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy
4.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 163(6): 1150-1152, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1041981

ABSTRACT

Thirty-eight tracheostomies were performed on patients with respiratory failure secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection over the month of April at North Shore University Hospital and Lenox Hill Hospital (members of Northwell Health System in Long Island and New York City). Follow-up by May 14 revealed that 21 (55.2%) had been weaned from ventilators and 7 (18.4%) underwent decannulation. Two patients (5.3%) expired in the weeks following tracheostomy. Between the 2 institutions, 10 attending surgeons performed all of the tracheostomies using appropriate personal protective equipment, and none demonstrated seroconversion within 1 to 2 weeks of this article.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Respiratory Insufficiency/surgery , Tracheostomy , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/surgery , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York/epidemiology , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
5.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 42(2): 102867, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1009277

ABSTRACT

Cross-sectional study to know if tracheostomy influences the time on mechanical ventilation and reduces the ICU stay in patients with SARS-CoV2. From February 14 to May 31, 2020, 29 patients: 23 men and 6 women, with an average age (SD) of 66.4 years (±6,2) required tracheostomy. The average intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 36 days [31-56.5]. The average days on mechanical ventilation was 28,5 days (±9.7). Mean time to tracheostomy was 15.2 days (±9.5) with an average disconnection time after procedure of 11.3 days (±7.4). The average hospital stay was 55 days [39-79]. A directly proportional relation between the number of days of MV and the number of days from ICU admission until tracheostomy showed a significant value of p = 0.008. For each day of delay in tracheostomy, the days of mechanical ventilation were increased by 0.6 days. There was no relation between days to tracheostomy and days to disconnection (p = 0.092). PaO2 / FiO2 (PAFI) before tracheostomy and Simplified Acute Physiology Score III (SAPS III) at admission presented a statistical relation with mortality, with an OR of 1.683 (95%CI; 0.926-2.351; p = 0.078) and an OR of 1.312 (CI95%: 1.011-1.703; p = 0.034) respectively. The length of stay in the ICU until the tracheostomy was not related to the risk of death (p = 0.682). PEEP and PaO2/FiO2 (PAFI) at admission and before tracheostomy and APACHE II, SAPS III and SOFA at admission did not show influence over time on MV. We conclude that the delay in tracheostomy increase the days on mechanical ventilation but does not influence stay or mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial , Tracheostomy , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Spain , Time Factors
6.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 41(6): 102676, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-713795

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The current study aims at assessing the effectiveness of the guidelines set up by our clinic for the protection of patients and staff which enabled us to proceed with urgent and oncological surgery after the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our ENT department devised specific equipment to be worn by the staff for personal protection when dealing with Covid-19 patients both in aerosol generating and non-generating procedures. Moreover, restrictive measures were enforced both for the outpatient department and for the ward where only urgent practices were carried out and visitors were not allowed, while non-urgent elective surgery was postponed. A codified scheme was followed to perform tracheostomy procedure in Covid-19 positive testing patients on the part of 3 specific teams of 2 surgeons each, while the resident educational program was reorganized to limit the spread of the infection. RESULTS: In about a couple of months (from March 8th to May 3rd) a relevant amount of medical tests and surgical procedures were carried out on non COVID-19 patients and a certain number of tracheostomies were performed on COVID-19 patients. Consequently, all the ENT personnel were checked and found negative. Also, all the patients in the ward were swab tested and chest X-rayed, only one had a positive outcome and was adequately handled and treated. CONCLUSION: Our ENT guidelines regarding personal protection equipment and multiple simultaneous diagnostic procedures have proved to be an essential instrument for the management of patients with both known and unknown COVID-19 status.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Infection Control/organization & administration , Operating Rooms/organization & administration , Otolaryngology , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/organization & administration , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Hospital Departments , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures , Personal Protective Equipment , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheostomy/methods
7.
Oper Tech Otolayngol Head Neck Surg ; 31(4): e43-e46, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-653312

ABSTRACT

A tracheostomy performed on patients infected with SARS CoV-2 is one of the procedures with the highest risks of aerosolization. Safety recommendations for carrying out this procedure are not suitable for implementation in every hospital. Despite the use of Personal Protection Equipment, the suit leaves the submental area unprotected, and even the face mask may not provide a full seal. The use of additional biosafety isolation equipment increases safety, thus preventing exposure to infecting particles and allowing the surgeon to perform the technique with the use of the available equipment; it reduces the risks of further trans-surgical complications and increases the possibilities of handling them in case they arise.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL