Manejo de vía aérea en pacientes COVID-19: una encuesta sobre la experiencia de 1125 médicos en España

BackgroundWe explored the experience of clinicians from the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology in airway management of COVID-19 patients.MethodsAn software-based survey including a 32-item questionnaire was conducted from April 18 to May 17, 2020. Participants who have been involved in tracheal intubations in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection were included anonymously after obtaining their informed consent. The primary outcome was the preferred airway device for tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included the variations in clinical practice including the preferred video laryngoscope, plans for difficult airway management, and personal protective equipment.Results1125 physicians completed the questionnaire with a response rate of 40,9%. Most participants worked in public hospitals and were anesthesiologists.The preferred device for intubation was the video laryngoscope (5.1/6), with the type of device in decreasing order as follows: Glidescope, C-MAC, Airtraq, McGrath and King Vision. The most frequently used device for intubation was the video laryngoscope (70,5%), using them in descending order as follow: the Airtraq, C-MAC, Glidescope, McGrath and King Vision.Discomfort of intubating wearing personal protective equipment and the frequency of breaching a security step was statistically significant, increasing the risk of cross infection between patients and physicians. The opinion of senior doctors differed from younger physicians in the type of video-laryngoscope used, the number of experts involved in tracheal intubation and the reason that caused more stress during the airway management.ConclusionsMost physicians preferred using a video-laryngoscope with remote monitor and disposable Macintosh blade, using the Frova guide.     

Consensus guidelines for managing the airway in patients with COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is highly contagious. Airway management of patients with COVID-19 is high risk to staff and patients. We aimed to develop principles for airway management of patients with COVID-19 to encourage safe, accurate and swift performance. This consensus statement has been brought together at short notice to advise on airway management for patients with COVID-19, drawing on published literature and immediately available information from clinicians and experts. Recommendations on the prevention of contamination of healthcare workers, the choice of staff involved in airway management, the training required and the selection of equipment are discussed. The fundamental principles of airway management in these settings are described for: emergency tracheal intubation; predicted or unexpected difficult tracheal intubation; cardiac arrest; anaesthetic care; and tracheal extubation. We provide figures to support clinicians in safe airway management of patients with COVID-19. The advice in this document is designed to be adapted in line with local workplace policies.     

Infection prevention and surgery in the pandemic era

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on surgical specialties. COVID-19 carries a significant risk to the surgical patient and the healthcare workers looking after them, with an increased incidence of pulmonary complications and mortality in patients who test positive perioperatively. Appropriate infection prevention and control measures are critical to ensure appropriate care is given and to reduce the risk of onward transmission. This article will discuss the measures that have been instigated and contributed to infection control in surgery, such as testing, patient isolation, personal protective equipment and ventilation. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to healthcare workers across many specialities working together to provide essential clinical care. This collaborative approach is critical to maintain excellent infection prevention and control practices required during this pandemic, which protect patients and preserve surgical services.     

Complications associated with paediatric airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international,multicentre, observational study

Respiratory adverse events in adults with COVID-19 undergoing general anaesthesia can be life-threatening. However, there remains a knowledge gap about respiratory adverse events in children with COVID-19. We created an international observational registry to collect airway management outcomes in children with COVID-19 who were having a general anaesthetic. We hypothesised that children with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 would experience more hypoxaemia and complications than those without. Between 3 April 2020 and 1 November 2020, 78 international centres participated. In phase 1, centres collected outcomes on all children (age ≤ 18 y) having a general anaesthetic for 2 consecutive weeks. In phase 2, centres recorded outcomes for children with test-confirmed or suspected COVID-19 (based on symptoms) having a general anaesthetic. We did not study children whose tracheas were already intubated. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypoxaemia during airway management. Secondary outcomes included: incidence of other complications; and first-pass success rate for tracheal intubation. In total, 7896 children were analysed (7567 COVID-19 negative and 329 confirmed or presumed COVID-19 positive). The incidence of hypoxaemia during airway management was greater in children who were COVID-19 positive (24 out of 329 (7%) vs. 214 out of 7567 (3%); OR 2.70 (95%CI 1.70–4.10)). Children who had symptoms of COVID-19 had a higher incidence of hypoxaemia compared with those who were asymptomatic (9 out of 51 (19%) vs. 14 out of 258 (5%), respectively; OR 3.7 (95%CI 1.5–9.1)). Children with confirmed or presumed COVID-19 have an increased risk of hypoxaemia during airway management in conjunction with general anaesthesia.     

新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期急诊手术患者的安全防护

目的探讨新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期急诊手术患者的安全防护管理措施,以预防医务人员及患者感染。方法新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期对87例患者行急诊手术,手术室加强三级防护,做好安全防护管理,包括实施手术区改造分区、医务人员培训及防护,加强患者术前、术中及术后管理等措施。结果 87例急诊手术均顺利完成,医务人员均未发生新型冠状病毒感染。结论加强新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期急诊手术患者的安全防护,能确保手术顺利实施的同时,保障患者和医务人员的安全。     

Intubation of SARS patients: infection and perspectives of healthcare workers

PURPOSE: The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 presented major challenges to the safety of anesthesiologists and other healthcare workers (HCWs). This study determined the incidence of SARS transmission to HCWs who intubated patients and analyzed the concerns of HCWs regarding personal and patient safety. METHODS: Healthcare workers who performed tracheal intubation in 10 Toronto hospitals were identified using the Ontario Public Health database. A questionnaire was used to collect information from the HCWs. To determine if the patterns of personal protection or concerns changed over time, data were analyzed according to whether the intubation occurred during SARS 1 (February 23 to April 21) or SARS 2 (April 22 to July 1). RESULTS: Thirty-three HCWs who performed 39 intubations on 35 SARS patients were interviewed. Three of 23 HCWs (13%) acquired SARS during SARS 1 whereas none (0/10) acquired SARS during SARS 2. Personal protection increased from SARS 1 to SARS 2 and HCWs' concerns changed over time. During SARS 1, concerns focused on the need for personal protective equipment whereas during SARS 2, concerns focused on the need for strict training and patient care protocols. HCWs perceived that their experiences were ineffectively integrated into risk management protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Protection guidelines failed to completely prevent the transmission of SARS to HCWs. Nine percent of the interviewed HCWs who intubated patients contracted SARS. A Risk Analysis Framework is presented to facilitate the rapid integration of HCWs' experiences into practice guidelines.     

Use of in situ simulation to evaluate the operational readiness of a high-consequence infectious disease intensive care unit

On 30 January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the outbreak of a coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) was a public health emergency of international concern. The WHO guidance states that patients with (COVID-19) should be managed by staff wearing appropriate personal protective equipment; however, working whilst wearing personal protective equipment is unfamiliar to many healthcare professionals. We ran high-fidelity, in-situ simulation of high-risk procedures on patients with COVID-19 in a negative-pressure side room on our intensive care unit (ICU). Our aim was to identify potential problems, test the robustness of our systems and inform modification of our standard operating procedures for any patients with COVID-19 admitted to our ICU. The simulations revealed several important latent risks and allowed us to put corrective measures in place before the admission of patients with COVID-19. We recommend that staff working in clinical areas expected to receive patients with COVID-19 conduct in-situ simulation in order to detect their own unique risks and aid in the creation of local guidelines of management of patients with COVID-19.     

Videolaryngoscopy vs. flexible fibrescopy for tracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilisation: a randomised controlled trial

In patients with cervical spine immobilisation, tracheal intubation devices other than a direct laryngoscope are frequently used to facilitate tracheal intubation and avoid related complications. In this randomised controlled trial, we compared videolaryngoscopic and fibrescopic tracheal intubation in patients with a cervical collar. Tracheal intubation was performed using either a videolaryngoscope with a non-channelled Macintosh blade (n = 166) or a flexible fibrescope (n = 164) in patients having elective cervical spine surgery whose neck was immobilised with a cervical collar to simulate a difficult airway. The primary outcome was the first attempt success rate of tracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes were the overall success rate of tracheal intubation; time to tracheal intubation; use of additional airway manoeuvres; and incidence and severity of tracheal intubation-related airway complications. First attempt success rate was higher in the videolaryngoscope group than in the fibrescope group (164/166 (98.8%) vs. 149/164 (90.9%), p = 0.003). Tracheal intubation was successful within three attempts in all patients. Median (IQR [range]) time to tracheal intubation was shorter (50.0 (41.0–72.0 [25.0–170.0]) s vs. 81.0 (65.0–107.0 [24.0–178.0]) s, p < 0.001) and additional airway manoeuvres were less frequent (30/166 (18.1%) vs. 91/164 (55.5%), p < 0.001) in the videolaryngoscope group compared with the fibrescope group. The incidence and severity of intubation-related airway complications were not different between the two groups. When performing tracheal intubation in patients with a cervical collar, videolaryngoscopy with a non-channelled Macintosh blade was superior to flexible fibrescopy.     

Aerosolisation during tracheal intubation and extubation in an operating theatre setting

Aerosol-generating procedures such as tracheal intubation and extubation pose a potential risk to healthcare workers because of the possibility of airborne transmission of infection. Detailed characterisation of aerosol quantities, particle size and generating activities has been undertaken in a number of simulations but not in actual clinical practice. The aim of this study was to determine whether the processes of facemask ventilation, tracheal intubation and extubation generate aerosols in clinical practice, and to characterise any aerosols produced. In this observational study, patients scheduled to undergo elective endonasal pituitary surgery without symptoms of COVID-19 were recruited. Airway management including tracheal intubation and extubation was performed in a standard positive pressure operating room with aerosols detected using laser-based particle image velocimetry to detect larger particles, and spectrometry with continuous air sampling to detect smaller particles. A total of 482,960 data points were assessed for complete procedures in three patients. Facemask ventilation, tracheal tube insertion and cuff inflation generated small particles 30–300 times above background noise that remained suspended in airflows and spread from the patient’s facial region throughout the confines of the operating theatre. Safe clinical practice of these procedures should reflect these particle profiles. This adds to data that inform decisions regarding the appropriate precautions to take in a real-world setting.     

Risks of AKI and Major Adverse Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome or Coronavirus Disease 2019

BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are closely related. The effect of AKI on the clinical outcomes of these two conditions is unclear.MethodsThis retrospective, territory-wide cohort study used an electronic public healthcare database in Hong Kong to identify patients with SARS or COVID-19 by diagnosis codes, virologic results, or both. The primary endpoint was a composite of intensive care unit admission, use of invasive mechanical ventilation, and/or death.ResultsWe identified 1670 patients with SARS and 1040 patients with COVID-19 (median ages, 41 versus 35 years, respectively). Among patients with SARS, 26% met the primary endpoint versus 5.3% of those with COVID-19. Diabetes mellitus, abnormal liver function, and AKI were factors significantly associated with the primary endpoint among patients with either SARS or COVID-19. Among patients with SARS, 7.9%, 2.1%, and 3.7% developed stage 1, stage 2, and stage 3 AKI, respectively; among those with COVID-19, 6.6%, 0.4%, and 1.1% developed stage 1, stage 2, and stage 3 AKI, respectively. In both groups, factors significantly associated with AKI included diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Among patients with AKI, those with COVID-19 had a lower rate of major adverse clinical outcomes versus patients with SARS. Renal function recovery usually occurred within 30 days after an initial AKI event.ConclusionsAKI rates were higher among patients with SARS than those with COVID-19. AKI was associated with major adverse clinical outcomes for both diseases. Patients with diabetes mellitus and abnormal liver function were also at risk of developing severe consequences after SARS and COVID-19 infection.     

COVID-19 and its effects upon orthopaedic surgery: The Trinidad and Tobago experience

The World Health Organisation(WHO) declared coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) a pandemic on March 11, 2020. COVID-19 is not the first infectious disease to affect Trinidad and Tobago. The country has faced outbreaks of both Chikungunya and Zika virus in 2014 and 2016 respectively. The viral pandemic is predicted to have a significant impact upon all countries, but the healthcare services in a developing country are especially vulnerable. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago swiftly established a parallel healthcare system to isolate and treat suspected and confirmed cases of COVID-19. Strick ‘lockdown' orders, office closures, social distancing and face mask usage recommendation were implemented following advice from the WHO. This approach has seen Trinidad and Tobago emerge from the second wave of infections, with the most recent Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker report indicating a favourable risk of openness index for the country. The effects of the pandemic on the orthopaedic services in the public and private healthcare systems show significant differences. Constrained by shortages in personal protective equipment and inadequate testing facilities, the public system moved into emergency mode prioritizing the care of urgent and critical cases. Private healthcare driven more by economic considerations, quickly instituted widespread safety measures to ensure that the clinics remained open and elective surgery was not interrupted. Orthopaedic teaching at The University of the West Indies was quickly migrated to an online platform to facilitate both medical students and residents. The Caribbean Association of Orthopedic Surgeons through its frequent virtual meetings provided a forum for continuing education and social interaction amongst colleagues. The pandemic has disrupted our daily routines leading to unparalleled changes to our lives and livelihoods. Many of these changes will remain long after the pandemic is over, permanently transforming the practice of orthopaedics.     

Transmission of infection among health care personnel performing surgical tracheostomies on COVID-19 patients

BackgroundStaff and patient safety are of paramount importance while performing a surgical tracheostomy (ST) during the corona virus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim was to assess the incidence of COVID-19 infection among the healthcare personnel (HCP) performing ST on COVID-19 patients.MethodsOne hundred and twenty-two HCP participating in 71 ST procedures performed at our institution between 26th March 2020 and 27th May 2020 were identified. A COVID-19 health questionnaire was distributed among staff with their consent. Data related to the presence of COVID-19 symptoms (new onset continuous cough, fever, loss of taste and/or loss of smell) among HCP involved in ST as well as patient related data were collected.ResultsOf the HCP who responded, eleven (15%,11/72) reported key COVID-19 symptoms and went into self-isolation. Ten members from this group underwent a COVID-19 swab test and three tested positive. Only one HCP attended hospital for symptomatic treatment, none required hospitalisation. Sixty percent (43/72) of the responders had a COVID-19 antibody test with a positive rate of 18.6% (8/43).Among the patients undergoing a ST, 67% (37/55) required a direct intensive care unit (ICU) admission; the mean age was 58 years (29–78) with a male preponderance (65.5%). The median time from intubation to ST was 15 days (range 5–33,IQR = 9). The overall mortality was 11% (6/55).ConclusionsST can be carried out safely with strict adherence to both, personnel protective equipment and ST protocols which are vital to mitigate the potential transmission of COVID-19 to the HCP.     

The role of fit testing N95/FFP2/FFP3 masks: a narrative review

For healthcare workers performing aerosol-generating procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic, well fitted filtering facepiece respirators, for example, N95/FFP2 or N99/FFP3 masks, are recommended as part of personal protective equipment. In this review, we evaluate the role of fit checking and fit testing of respirators, in addition to airborne protection provided by respirators. Filtering facepiece respirators are made of material with sufficient high filter capacity to protect against airborne respiratory viruses. Adequate viral protection can only be provided by respirators that properly fit the wearer's facial characteristics. Initial fit pass rates vary between 40% and 90% and are especially low in female and in Asian healthcare workers. Fit testing is recommended to ensure a proper fit of respirators for the individual healthcare worker so that alternative respirators can be selected if required. Although fit testing is required to comply with respirator standards, it is not performed consistently within all healthcare settings. Fit checking (a self-test) is recommended every time a healthcare worker dons a respirator, but is unreliable in detecting proper fit or leak. Additionally, fit testing has a high educational value and as such is best performed as part of a hospital respiratory protection programme. Whether fit checking alone, as opposed to fit tested and fit checked respirators, provides adequate airborne protection against aerosols containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus and other respiratory viruses remains unknown. While fit testing undoubtedly incurs additional costs, it is still recommended, not only to protect healthcare workers but also as it may reduce overall healthcare cost when considering the potential costs of sickness leave and the associated legal costs of compensation.     

Preparing for a COVID-19 pandemic: a review of operating room outbreak response measures in a large tertiary hospital in Singapore

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been designated a public health emergency of international concern. To prepare for a pandemic, hospitals need a strategy to manage their space, staff, and supplies so that optimum care is provided to patients. In addition, infection prevention measures need to be implemented to reduce in-hospital transmission. In the operating room, these preparations involve multiple stakeholders and can present a significant challenge. Here, we describe the outbreak response measures of the anesthetic department staffing the largest (1,700-bed) academic tertiary level acute care hospital in Singapore (Singapore General Hospital) and a smaller regional hospital (Sengkang General Hospital). These include engineering controls such as identification and preparation of an isolation operating room, administrative measures such as modification of workflow and processes, introduction of personal protective equipment for staff, and formulation of clinical guidelines for anesthetic management. Simulation was valuable in evaluating the feasibility of new operating room set-ups or workflow. We also discuss how the hierarchy of controls can be used as a framework to plan the necessary measures during each phase of a pandemic, and review the evidence for the measures taken. These containment measures are necessary to optimize the quality of care provided to COVID-19 patients and to reduce the risk of viral transmission to other patients or healthcare workers.     

The impact of respiratory protective equipment on difficult airway management: a randomised,crossover, simulation study

The current international COVID-19 health crisis underlines the importance of adequate and suitable personal protective equipment for clinical staff during acute airway management. This study compares the impacts of standard air-purifying respirators and powered air-purifying respirators during simulated difficult airway scenarios. Twenty-five anaesthetists carried out four different standardised difficult intubation drills, either unprotected (control), or wearing a standard or a powered respirator. Treatment times and wearer comfort were determined and compared. In the wearer comfort evaluation form, operators rated mobility, noise, heat, vision and speech intelligibility. All anaesthetists accomplished the treatment objectives of all study arms without adverse events. Total mean (SD) intubation times for the four interventions did not show significant differences between the powered and the standard respirator groups, being 16.4 (8.6) vs. 19.2 (5.2) seconds with the Airtraq™; 11.4 (3.4) vs. 10.0 (2.1) seconds with the videolaryngoscope; 39.2 (4.5) vs. 40.1 (4.8) seconds with the fibreoptic bronchoscope scope; and 15.4 (5.7) vs. 15.1 (5.0) seconds for standard tracheal intubation by direct laryngoscopy, respectively. Videolaryngoscopy allowed the shortest intubation times regardless of the respiratory protective device used. Anaesthetists rated heat and vision significantly higher in the powered respirator group; however, noise levels were perceived to be significantly lower than in the standard respirator group. We conclude that standard and powered respirators do not significantly prolong simulated advanced intubation procedures.     

Impact of COVID-19 Protocols on Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundSurgical site infection (SSI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditures. Our institution intensified hygiene standards during the COVID-19 pandemic; hospital staff exercised greater hand hygiene, glove use, and mask compliance. We examined the effect of these factors on SSI rates for primary THA (pTHA) and revision THA (rTHA).MethodsA retrospective review was performed identifying THA from January 2019 to June 2021 at a single institution. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared before (January 2019 to February 2020) and during (May 2020 to June 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic and during the first (May 2020 to November 2020) and second (December 2020 to June 2021) periods of the pandemic. Cohorts were compared using the Chi-squared test and independent samples t-test.ResultsA total of 2,682 pTHA (prepandemic: 1,549 [57.8%]; pandemic: 1,133 [42.2%]) and 402 rTHA (prepandemic: 216 [53.7%]; Pandemic: 186 [46.2%]) were included. For primary and revision cases, superficial and deep SSI rates were similar before and during COVID-19. During COVID-19, the incidence of all (?0.43%, P = .029) and deep (?0.36%, P = .049) SSIs decreased between the first and second periods for rTHA. pTHA patients had longer operative times (P < .001) and shorter length of stay (P = .006) during COVID-19. Revision cases had longer operative times (P = .004) and length of stay (P = .046). Both pTHA and rTHA were discharged to skilled nursing facilities less frequently during COVID-19.ConclusionDuring COVID-19, operative times were longer in both pTHA and rTHA and patients were less likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility. Although intensified hygienic standards may lower SSI rates, infection rates did not significantly differ after our hospital implemented personal protective guidelines and a mask mandate.     

显微外科预防新型冠状病毒肺炎的应急护理管理措施

目的 探讨手足显微外科在新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)期间的应急护理管理方法,并评价效果. 方法 2020年1月20日至2月20日,采取应急护理管理措施:做好急诊患者的体温及肺部CT筛查,对所有在院患者及家属进行体温及指脉氧监测,高热或肺部CT异常患者的隔离与确诊,疑似及确诊患者病房的消毒与终末处理,医护人员的个人防护与培训,防护用具的规范使用与管理,病房人力资源的调配与管理,加强住院患者COVID-19的知识宣教以缓解焦虑等,确保患者及医务人员的安全.结果 本科室持续发热患者4例,2例排除COVID-19;1例确诊后转诊;1例高度疑似,已居家隔离.医护人员培训完成率100%,合格率100%.支援一线医护人员共48人,后备人员17人.疫情初期1例医生感染,应急管理措施落实之后无人感染;科室防护用具使用得当;在院患者无过激情绪反应,口罩佩戴依从性100%.结论 科室疫情期间所采取应急管理办法有效避免了院内交叉感染的发生,保障了医务人员及患者的安全,科学及时有效.     

A randomised cross‐over trial comparing the McGrath® Series 5 videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope in patients with cervical spine immobilisation

We compared the performance of the McGrath^® Series 5 videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh laryngoscope in 49 patients without suspected cervical spine pathology, whose cervical spine was immobilised using a semi‐rigid collar. The primary outcome was the view obtained at laryngoscopy. Secondary outcomes included time to tracheal intubation, rates of successful intubation and incidence of complications. In all patients, the view was better (92%) or the same (8%) in the McGrath group versus the Macintosh group (p < 0.01). There were no failed intubations in the McGrath group and seven (28%) in the Macintosh group (p < 0.02). There was no statistical difference in time taken to intubate or incidence of complications. We conclude that the McGrath^® Series 5 is a superior laryngoscope when cervical spine immobilisation is maintained during tracheal intubation.