Assessing the safety of continued perioperative antithrombotic therapy in endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis.

PURPOSE: Given the increasing utilization of endoscopic surgery, particularly for airway stenosis management in the era of COVID-19 due to prolonged intubation, it is important to examine whether continuing antithrombotic therapy perioperatively influences bleeding complications. We examined the impact of perioperative antithrombotic use on postoperative bleeding complications following endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study from January 2016 to December 2021 of cases of patients ≥18 years who underwent endoscopic airway surgery for posterior glottic, subglottic, and tracheal stenosis at a single institution. Cases were excluded if they were an open airway surgery. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative bleeding complications across cases of patients naive to and on baseline antithrombotic therapy, and those with preoperative continuation versus cessation of antithrombotic therapy. RESULTS: 258 cases across 96 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these 258 cases, 43.4 % (n = 112) were performed for patients on baseline antithrombotic therapy and 56.6 % (n = 146) for those not on antithrombotic therapy. Likelihood of perioperative continuation of apixaban was 0.052 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 0.002-0.330, p < 0.001). Likelihood of perioperative continuation of aspirin was 9.87 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 2.32-43.0, p < 0.001). Two instances of postoperative bleeding were found: both in patients who were on aspirin without perioperative cessation for COVID-related coagulopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that perioperative continuation of aspirin is relatively safe in the setting of endoscopic surgery for airway stenosis management. Prospective investigations to increase understanding of perioperative antithrombotics for COVID-related coagulopathy are warranted.

Assessing the safety of continued perioperative antithrombotic therapy in endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis

Purpose Given the increasing utilization of endoscopic surgery, particularly for airway stenosis management in the era of COVID-19 due to prolonged intubation, it is important to examine whether continuing antithrombotic therapy perioperatively influences bleeding complications. We examined the impact of perioperative antithrombotic use on postoperative bleeding complications following endoscopic airway surgery for laryngotracheal stenosis. Materials and methods Retrospective study from January 2016 to December 2021 of cases of patients ≥18 years who underwent endoscopic airway surgery for posterior glottic, subglottic, and tracheal stenosis at a single institution. Cases were excluded if they were an open airway surgery. The primary outcome was the occurrence of postoperative bleeding complications across cases of patients naive to and on baseline antithrombotic therapy, and those with preoperative continuation versus cessation of antithrombotic therapy. Results 258 cases across 96 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these 258 cases, 43.4 % (n = 112) were performed for patients on baseline antithrombotic therapy and 56.6 % (n = 146) for those not on antithrombotic therapy. Likelihood of perioperative continuation of apixaban was 0.052 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 0.002–0.330, p < 0.001). Likelihood of perioperative continuation of aspirin was 9.87 (odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval: 2.32–43.0, p < 0.001). Two instances of postoperative bleeding were found: both in patients who were on aspirin without perioperative cessation for COVID-related coagulopathy. Conclusions Our findings suggest that perioperative continuation of aspirin is relatively safe in the setting of endoscopic surgery for airway stenosis management. Prospective investigations to increase understanding of perioperative antithrombotics for COVID-related coagulopathy are warranted.

Long-term laryngological sequelae and patient-reported outcomes after COVID-19 infection.

PURPOSE: We examine prevalence, characteristics, quality of life (QOL) assessments, and long-term effects of interventions for laryngeal dysfunction after recovery from COVID-19 infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 653 patients presenting to Yale's COVID clinic from April 2020 to August 2021 were identified retrospectively. Patients with PCR-positive COVID-19 who underwent evaluation by fellowship-trained laryngologists were included. Patient demographics, comorbidities, intubation/tracheostomy, strobolaryngoscopy, voice metrics, and management data were collected. Patient-reported QOL indices were Dyspnea Index (DI), Cough Severity Index (CSI), Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10), Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10), and Reflux Symptom Index (RSI). RESULTS: 57 patients met inclusion criteria: 37 (64.9 %) were hospitalized for COVID-19 infection and 24 (42.1 %) required intubation. Mean duration between COVID-19 diagnosis and presentation to laryngology was significantly shorter for patients who were intubated compared to non-intubated (175 ± 98 days versus 256 ± 150 days, respectively, p = 0.025). Dysphonia was diagnosed in 40 (70.2 %) patients, dysphagia in 14 (25.0 %) patients, COVID-related laryngeal hypersensitivity in 13 (22.8 %), and laryngotracheal stenosis (LTS) in 10 (17.5 %) patients. Of the 17 patients who underwent voice therapy, 11 (64.7 %) reported improvement in their symptoms and 2 (11.8 %) patients reported resolution. VHI scores decreased for patients who reported symptom improvement. 7 (70 %) patients with LTS required >1 procedural intervention before symptom improvement. Improvement across QOL indices was seen in patients with LTS. CONCLUSIONS: Laryngeal dysfunction commonly presents and is persistent for months after recovery from COVID-19 in non-hospitalized and non-intubated patients. Voice therapy and procedural interventions have the potential to address post-COVID laryngeal dysfunction.

A Review of Telemedicine Applications in Otorhinolaryngology: Considerations During the Coronavirus Disease of 2019 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: Review the published literature of telemedicine's use within otorhinolaryngology (ORL), highlight its successful implementation, and document areas with need of future research. STUDY DESIGN: State of the Art Review. METHODS: Three independent, comprehensive searches for articles published on the subject of telemedicine in ORL were conducted of literature available from January 2000 to April 2020. Search terms were designed to identify studies which examined telemedicine use within ORL. Consensus among authors was used to include all relevant articles. RESULTS: While several, small reports document clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and the cost of telemedicine, much of the literature on telemedicine in ORL is comprised of preliminary, proof-of-concept reports. Further research will be necessary to establish its strengths and limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Particularly during the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic, telemedicine can, and should, be used within ORL practice. This review can assist in guiding providers in implementing telemedicine that has been demonstrated to be successful, and direct future research. Laryngoscope, 131:744-759, 2021.