Endoscopic sphenopalatine foramen cauterization is an effective treatment modification of endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation for intractable posterior epistaxis.

PURPOSE: Endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation (ESPAL) is known as an effective treatment for posterior epistaxis. Anatomical variations of the intranasal branching may result in long operative time and possible inadequate cauterization. A modification of ESPAL by cauterization at the sphenopalatine foramen (SPF), has been performed by our group. Our study assessed the clinical benefit of endoscopic sphenopalatine foramen cauterization (ESFC) and compared it to ESPAL. METHOD: A retrospective study was conducted. Patients who received ESFC for posterior epistaxis from 2016 to 2018 at a tertiary hospital were recruited. Middle meatal antrostomy was done. After ethmoidal crest was identified and nipped, pterygopalatine fossa was entered through the SPF. Sphenopalatine artery (SPA) and its branches within the SPF were cauterized without identification of any SPA distal branches in the nasal cavity. Patients receiving conventional ESPAL by the same surgeon were recruited and compared as control. Patients were followed-up for 3 months. Success rate, operative time, and complication were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were identified. Recurrent epistaxis was absent in 90.0% and 100% of patients receiving ESPAL (9/10 patients) and ESFC (24/24 patients) respectively, p = 0.294. Median operative time was 115 and 60 min, respectively, p < 0.001. Ipsilateral hard palatal or anterior palatal numbness were found in one and three patients, respectively. All resolved spontaneously within 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: ESFC is effective in treating posterior epistaxis. It requires significantly less amount of time while the success rate was comparable to conventional ESPAL.

Precision silver nitrate cautery of the posterior nasal cavity.

BACKGROUND: This technical note describes a novel method of cauterising the posterior nasal cavity through the use of a plastic straw and silver nitrate. OBJECTIVE: This technique aims to prevent unwanted damage to surrounding nasal mucosa. METHODS: Once the nasal cavity has been prepared for cauterisation, the silver nitrate stick is navigated to the bleeding point covered by the plastic straw. The silver nitrate stick is then advanced onto the bleeding point allowing precise cauterisation of the nasal mucosa, without effecting surrounding healthy mucosa.

Intraoperative coagulopathy during cesarean section as an unsuspected initial presentation of COVID-19: a case report.

BACKGROUND: The world's understanding of COVID-19 continues to evolve as the scientific community discovers unique presentations of this disease. This case report depicts an unexpected intraoperative coagulopathy during a cesarean section in an otherwise asymptomatic patient who was later found to have COVID-19. This case suggests that there may be a higher risk for intrapartum bleeding in the pregnant, largely asymptomatic COVID-positive patient with more abnormal COVID laboratory values. CASE: The case patient displayed D-Dimer elevations beyond what is typically observed among this hospital's COVID-positive peripartum population and displayed significantly more oozing than expected intraoperatively, despite normal prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, fibrinogen, and platelets. CONCLUSION: There is little published evidence on the association between D-Dimer and coagulopathy among the pregnant population infected with SARS-CoV-2. This case report contributes to the growing body of evidence on the effects of COVID-19 in pregnancy. A clinical picture concerning for intraoperative coagulopathy may be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection during cesarean sections, and abnormal COVID laboratory tests, particularly D-Dimer, may help identify the patients in which this presentation occurs.

Suction mitigation of airborne particulate generated during sinonasal drilling and cautery.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted endonasal surgery, and recent experimentation has demonstrated that sinonasal drilling and cautery have significant propensity for airborne particulate generation immediately adjacent to the surgical field. In the present investigation, we assessed nasopharyngeal suctioning as a mitigation strategy to decrease particulate spread during simulated endonasal surgical activity. METHODS: Airborne particulate generation in the 1-µm to 10-µm range was quantified with an optical particle sizer in real-time during cadaveric-simulated anterior and posterior endonasal drilling and cautery conditions. To test suction mitigation, experiments were performed both with and without a rigid suction placed in the contralateral nostril, terminating in the nasopharynx. RESULTS: Both anterior (medial maxillary wall and nasal septum) and posterior (sphenoid rostrum) drilling produced significant particulate generation in the 1-µm to 10-µm range throughout the duration of drilling (p < 0.001) without the use of suction, whereas nasopharyngeal suction use eliminated the detection of generated airborne particulate. A similar effect was seen with nasal cautery, with significant particle generation (p < 0.001) that was reduced to undetectable levels with the use of nasopharyngeal suction. CONCLUSION: The use of nasopharyngeal suctioning via the contralateral nostril minimizes airborne particulate spread during simulated sinonasal drilling and cautery. In the era of COVID-19, this technique offers an immediately available measure that may increase surgical safety.

The risk of COVID-19 transmission by laparoscopic smoke may be lower than for laparotomy: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Surgical smoke is a well-recognized hazard in the operating room. At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical societies quickly published guidelines recommending avoiding laparoscopy or to consider open surgery because of the fear of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through surgical smoke or aerosol. This narrative review of the literature aimed to determine whether there are any differences in the creation of surgical smoke/aerosol between laparoscopy and laparotomy and if laparoscopy may be safer than laparotomy. METHODS: A literature search was performed using the Pubmed, Embase and Google scholar search engines, as well as manual search of the major journals with specific COVID-19 sections for ahead-of-print publications. RESULTS: Of 1098 identified articles, we critically appraised 50. Surgical smoke created by electrosurgical and ultrasonic devices has the same composition both in laparoscopy and laparotomy. SARS-CoV-2 has never been found in surgical smoke and there is currently no data to support its virulence if ever it could be transmitted through surgical smoke/aerosol. CONCLUSION: If laparoscopy is performed in a closed cavity enabling containment of surgical smoke/aerosol, and proper evacuation of smoke with simple measures is respected, and as long as laparoscopy is not contraindicated, we believe that this surgical approach may be safer for the operating team while the patient has the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Evidence-based research in this field is needed for definitive determination of safety.