Suction mask device: a simple, inexpensive, and effective method of reducing spread of aerosolized particles during endoscopic endonasal surgery in the era of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Aerosol-generating procedures, including endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES), are a major risk for physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Techniques for reducing aerosolization and risk of transmission of COVID-19 during these procedures would be valuable to the neurosurgical community. The authors aimed to simulate the generation of small-particle aerosols during EES and craniectomy in order to develop methods to reduce the spread of aerosolized particles, and to test the effectiveness of these methods. METHODS: This study was performed at the Anatomical Laboratory for Visuospatial Innovations in Otolaryngology and Neurosurgery at The Ohio State University. The following two scenarios were used to measure three different particle sizes (0.3, 2.5, and 10 µm) generated: 1) drilling frontotemporal bone, simulating a craniectomy; and 2) drilling sphenoid bone, simulating an endonasal approach. A suction mask device was created with the aim of reducing particle release. The presence of particles was measured without suction, with a single Frazier tip suction in the field, and with the suction mask device in addition to the Frazier suction tip. Particles were measured 12 cm from the craniectomy or endonasal drilling region. RESULTS: In the absence of any aerosol-reducing devices, the number of particles measured during craniectomy was significantly higher than that generated by endonasal drilling. This was true regardless of the particle size measured (0.3 µm, p < 0.001; 2.5 µm, p < 0.001; and 10 µm, p < 0.001). The suction mask device reduced the release of particles of all sizes measured in the craniectomy simulation (0.3 µm, p < 0.001; 2.5 µm, p < 0.001; and 10 µm, p < 0.001) and particles of 0.3 µm and 2.5 µm in the single Frazier suction simulation (0.3 µm, p = 0.031; and 2.5 µm, p = 0.026). The suction mask device further reduced the release of particles of all sizes during EES simulation (0.3 µm, p < 0.001; and 2.5 µm, p < 0.001) and particles of 0.3 µm and 2.5 µm in the single Frazier suction simulation (0.3 µm, p = 0.033; and 2.5 µm, p = 0.048). Large particles (10 µm) were not detected during EES. CONCLUSIONS: The suction mask device is a simple and effective means of reducing aerosol release during EES, and it could potentially be used during mastoidectomies. This could be a valuable tool to reduce the risk of procedure-associated viral transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Patient-Directed Home Drain Removal in Head and Neck Surgery.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of at home drain removal in head and neck surgery patients. METHODS: The study population included patients who underwent head and neck surgery at an academic tertiary care center between February 2020 and November 2020 and were discharged with one to four drains with instructions for home removal. Prior to discharge, patients received thorough drain removal education. Patients were prospectively followed to evaluate for associated outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred patients were evaluated in the study. There was record for ninety-seven patients receiving education at discharge. The most common methods of education were face-to-face education and written instructions with educational video link provided. Of 123 drains upon discharge, 110 drains (89.4%) were removed at home while 13 (10.6%) were removed in office. Most drains were located in the neck (86.4%). There was one seroma, two hematomas, two drain site infections, and five ED visits; however, none of these complications were directly associated with the action of drain removal at home. Calculated cost savings for travel and lost wages was $259.82 per round trip saved. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that home drain removal can provide a safe and efficacious option for patients following head and neck surgery. This approach was safe and associated with patient cost savings and better utilization of provider's time. Furthermore, patients and healthcare providers avoided additional in-person encounters and exposures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings warrant further investigation into cost savings and formal patient satisfaction associated with home drain removal. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2471-2477, 2021.

Transnasal endoscopic skull base surgery in the COVID-19 era: Recommendations for increasing the safety of the method.

Transnasal endoscopic skull base surgery (eSBS) has been adopted in recent years, in great part to replace the extended procedures required by external approaches. Though sometimes perceived as "minimally invasive", eSBS still necessitates extensive manipulations within the nose/paranasal sinuses. Furthermore, exposure of susceptible cerebral structures to light and heat emanated by the telescope should be considered to comprehensively evaluate the safety of the method. While the number of studies specifically targeting eSBS safety still remains scarce, the problem has recently expanded with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which also has implications for the safety of the surgical personnel. It must be stressed that eSBS may directly expose the surgeon to potentially high volumes of virus-contaminated aerosol. Thus, the anxiety of both the patient and the surgeon must be taken into account. Consequently, safety requirements must follow the highest standards. This paper summarizes current knowledge on SARS-CoV-2 biology and the peculiarities of human immunology in respect of the host-virus relationship, taking into account the latest information concerning the SARS-CoV-2 worrisome affinity for the nervous system. Based on this information, a workflow proposal is offered for consideration. This could be useful not only for the duration of the pandemic, but also during the unpredictable timeline involving our coexistence with the virus. Recommendations include technical modifications to the operating theatre, personal protective equipment, standards of testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection, prophylactic pretreatment with interferon, anti-IL6 treatment and, last but not least, psychological support for the patient.

Time to Surgery and Survival in Head and Neck Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has required triage and delays in surgical care throughout the world. The impact of these surgical delays on survival for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains unknown. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 37 730 patients in the National Cancer Database with HNSCC who underwent primary surgical management from 2004 to 2016 was performed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of overall survival. Bootstrapping methods were used to identify optimal time-to-surgery (TTS) thresholds at which overall survival differences were greatest. Cox proportional hazard models with or without restricted cubic splines were used to determine the association between TTS and survival. RESULTS: The study identified TTS as an independent predictor of overall survival (OS). Bootstrapping the data to dichotomize the cohort identified the largest rise in hazard ratio (HR) at day 67, which was used as the optimal TTS cut-point in survival analysis. The patients who underwent surgical treatment longer than 67 days after diagnosis had a significantly increased risk of death (HR, 1.189; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.122-1.261; P < 0.0001). For every 30-day delay in TTS, the hazard of death increased by 4.6%. Subsite analysis showed that the oropharynx subsite was most affected by surgical delays, followed by the oral cavity. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing TTS is an independent predictor of survival for patients with HNSCC and should be performed within 67 days after diagnosis to achieve optimal survival outcomes.

Respiratory and pulmonary complications in head and neck cancer patients: Evidence-based review for the COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary complications and infections frequently affect patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Common characteristics can predispose these patients to the development of severe respiratory illness, which may be particularly relevant during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A scoping review was performed to assess the impact of pulmonary comorbidities and adverse respiratory outcomes in HNSCC patients. RESULTS: Advanced age, history of tobacco and alcohol abuse, and cardiopulmonary comorbidities are significant risk factors for the development of adverse respiratory outcomes. Treatment toxicities from radiation or chemoradiation therapy significantly increase these risks. CONCLUSION: Respiratory complications are a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality among HNSCC patients, and the COVID-19 pandemic may disproportionately affect this population. Interventions designed to decrease smoking and alcohol use, improve oral hygiene, and aggressively manage medical comorbidities are important to the long-term management and health of these patients.