Appropriateness for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeons in case of pregnancy, breastfeeding, or childbearing potential: Yo-IFOS and CEORL-HNS joint clinical consensus statement.

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are a key step in fighting the pandemic. Nevertheless, their rapid development did not allow for testing among specific population subgroups such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, or elaborating specific guidelines for healthcare personnel working in high infection risk specialties, such as otolaryngology (ORL). This clinical consensus statement (CCS) aims to offer guidance for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to this high-risk population based on the best evidence available. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international panel of 33 specialists judged statements through a two-round modified Delphi method survey. Statements were designed to encompass the following topics: risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and use of protective equipment in ORL; SARS-Cov-2 infection and vaccines and respective risks for the mother/child dyad; and counseling for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnant, breastfeeding, or fertile healthcare workers (PBFHW). All ORL PBFHW were considered as the target audience. RESULTS: Of the 13 statements, 7 reached consensus or strong consensus, 2 reached no consensus, and 2 reached near-consensus. According to the statements with strong consensus otorhinolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or with childbearing potential should have the opportunity to receive SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Moreover, personal protective equipment (PPE) should still be used even after the vaccination. CONCLUSION: Until prospective evaluations on these topics are available, ORL-HNS must be considered a high infection risk specialty. While the use of PPE remains pivotal, ORL PBFHW should be allowed access to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination provided they receive up-to-date information.

Risk of contagion of SARS-CoV-2 among otorhinolaryngologists in Spain during the "Two waves".

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to obtain data about the contagion rate among Otolaryngologists in Spanish ENT Departments and about the clinical outcomes in positive otolaryngologists. As a secondary objective, we aim to assess the rate of contagion in the first and the second Covid-19 wave in Spain among Otorhinolaryngologists and the regional distribution by ENT-Departments. METHODS: Study design and population: This is a prospective observational study in a cohort of 975 Otolaryngologists from 87 ENT Departments conducted from March 25 to November 17 in our collaborative group, COVID ORL ESP. COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was the diagnostic standard. Hospitalization and/or intensive care admission and mortality was recorded as non-identified data. RESULTS: Data collected from 975 otolaryngologist from 87 Departments resulted in 157 (16.5%) otolaryngologists testing positive for SARS-CoV-19 by RT-PCR. Important geographic differences in contagion are reported. A total of 136 (86.6%) otolaryngologists were tested positive during the first wave and 21 (13.3%) during the second wave. At the last cut-off point of the study only 30/87 ENT Departments (34.5%) remained COVID19-free and 5 Departments reported more than 50% staff members testing positive. The majority of positive tested otolaryngologists (126/157; 80.2%) had only mild or no symptoms, 17 developed moderate symptoms (10.8%) and 3 had pneumonia not requiring hospitalization (2%). Five colleagues were admitted at hospital, 4 required ICU (2.5%) and 2 colleges died from COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the SARS-CoV-19 pandemic otolaryngologists in Spain have been overall the group suffering the highest rate of contagion, particularly during the first month. Subsequently, the Spanish Ministry of Health should include otorhinolaryngologists as a high-risk group in airborne pandemics.

[Consensus document of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC), the Spanish Society of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery (SEORL-CCC) and the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology and Resuscitation (SEDAR) on tracheotomy in patients with COVID-19 infection]. / Documento de consenso de la Sociedad Española de Medicina Intensiva, Crítica, y Unidades Coronarias (SEMICYUC), la Sociedad Española de Otorrinolaringología y Cirugía de Cabeza y Cuello (SEORL-CCC) y la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR) sobre la traqueotomía en pacientes con COVID-19.

The current COVID-19 pandemic has rendered up to 15% of patients under mechanical ventilation. Because the subsequent tracheotomy is a frequent procedure, the three societies mostly involved (SEMICYUC, SEDAR and SEORL-CCC) have setup a consensus paper that offers an overview about indications and contraindications of tracheotomy, be it by puncture or open, clarifying its respective advantages and enumerating the ideal conditions under which they should be performed, as well as the necessary steps. Regular and emergency situations are displayed together with the postoperative measures.

Timing, Complications, and Safety of Tracheotomy in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19.

IMPORTANCE: The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to unprecedented needs for invasive ventilation, with 10% to 15% of intubated patients subsequently requiring tracheotomy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the complications, safety, and timing of tracheotomy performed for critically ill patients with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort study assessed consecutive patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who had COVID-19 that required tracheotomy. Patients were recruited from March 16 to April 10, 2020, at a tertiary referral center. EXPOSURES: A surgical tracheotomy was performed for all patients following recommended criteria for use of personal protective equipment (PPE). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number of subthyroid operations, the tracheal entrance protocol, and use of PPE. Infections among the surgeons were monitored weekly by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction of nasopharyngeal swab samples. Short-term complications, weaning, and the association of timing of tracheotomy (early [≤10 days] vs late [>10 days]) with total required days of invasive ventilation were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.8 [9.2] years; 33 [66%] male) participated in the study. All tracheotomies were performed at the bedside. The median time from intubation to tracheotomy was 9 days (interquartile range, 2-24 days). A subthyroid approach was completed for 46 patients (92%), and the tracheal protocol was adequately achieved for 40 patients (80%). Adequate PPE was used, with no infection among surgeons identified 4 weeks after the last tracheotomy. Postoperative complications were rare, with minor bleeding (in 6 patients [12%]) being the most common complication. The successful weaning rate was higher in the early tracheotomy group than in the late tracheotomy group (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 0.96-6.75), but the difference was not statistically significant. There was less time of invasive mechanical ventilatory support with early tracheotomy compared with late tracheotomy (mean [SD], 18 [5.4] vs 22.3 [5.7] days). The reduction of invasive ventilatory support was achieved at the expense of the pretracheotomy period. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, with the use of a standardized protocol aimed at minimizing COVID-19 risks, bedside open tracheotomy was a safe procedure for patients and surgeons, with minimal complications. Timing of tracheotomy may be important in reducing time of invasive mechanical ventilation, with potential implications to intensive care unit availability during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Chemosensory dysfunction in COVID-19 out-patients.

BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak in China due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) various studies have been published describing olfactory and gustatory dysfunction (OGD). OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate the frequency and severity of OGD in SARS-CoV-2 (+) out-patients compared to controls with common cold/flu like symptoms and two negative RT-PCR. METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study on SARS-CoV-2-positive out-patients (n = 197) and controls (n = 107) from five Spanish Hospitals. Severity of OGD was categorized by visual analogue scale (VAS). Frequency and severity of the chemosensory impairment were analyzed. RESULTS: The frequencies of smell (70.1%) and taste loss (65%) were significantly higher among COVID-19 subjects than in the controls (20.6% and 19.6%, respectively). Simultaneous OGD was more frequent in the COVID-19 group (61.9% vs 10.3%) and they scored higher in VAS for severity of OGD than controls. In the COVID-19 group, OGD was predominant in young subjects 46.5 ± 14.5 and females (63.5%). Subjects with severe loss of smell were younger (42.7 years old vs 45.5 years old), and recovered later (median = 7, IQR = 5.5 vs median = 4, IQR = 3) than those with mild loss of smell. Subjects with severe loss of taste, recovered later in days (median = 7, IQR = 6 vs median = 2, IQR = 2), compared to those with mild loss. CONCLUSION: OGD is a prevalent symptom in COVID-19 subjects with significant differences compared to controls. It was predominant in young and females subjects. Stratified analysis by the severity of OGD showed that more than 60% of COVID-19 subjects presented a severe OGD who took a longer time to recover compared to those with mild symptoms.

Outcome of 1890 tracheostomies for critical COVID-19 patients: a national cohort study in Spain.

BACKGROUND: The question of an optimal strategy and outcomes in COVID-19 tracheostomy has not been answered yet. The critical focus in our case study is to evaluate the outcomes of tracheostomy on intubated COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A multicentric prospective observational study of 1890 COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy across 120 hospitals was conducted over 7 weeks in Spain (March 28 to May 15, 2020). Data were collected with an innovative approach: instant messaging via WhatsApp. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: complications, achieved weaning and decannulation and survival. RESULTS: We performed 1,461 surgical (81.3%) and 429 percutaneous tracheostomies. Median timing of tracheostomy was 12 days (4-42 days) since orotracheal intubation. A close follow-up of 1616/1890 (85.5%) patients at the cut-off time of 1-month follow-up showed that in 842 (52.1%) patients, weaning was achieved, while 391 (24.2%) were still under mechanical ventilation and 383 (23.7%) patients had died from COVID-19. Decannulation among those in whom weaning was successful (n = 842) was achieved in 683 (81%) patients. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest cohort of COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy. The critical focus is the unprecedented amount of tracheostomies: 1890 in 7 weeks. Weaning could be achieved in over half of the patients with follow-up. Almost one out of four tracheotomized patients died from COVID-19.