0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Barrier enclosure device during patient preparation for flexible bronchoscopy

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sir, Bronchoscopy is most often performed under local anesthesia with or without conscious sedation.[1] The most troublesome complaint during bronchoscopy is cough. To prevent cough and improve the patient comfort, the upper airways are anesthetized both prior and during the procedure. The airways can be anesthetized either with nebulization of 4% lignocaine solution, with 10% lignocaine spray, or their combination. A recent study found that 10% lignocaine spray was superior to both the nebulization or the combination of nebulization and spray of lignocaine solution.[2] However, spraying of the airways with lignocaine can be associated with aerosol generation and may place the health-care personnel (HCP) at a high risk of infection by the type 2 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in the current scenario. In this regard, the use of a barrier device can potentially reduce the risk of infection during patient preparation, similar to its use during airway intubation.[3] Herein, we describe one such barrier device that can be used for the safe performance of patient preparation prior to bronchoscopy. The barrier device is a rectangular box made of transparent plastic material that would cover the patient's head Figure 1. The enclosure device is open from one end through which the patient can position his head for spraying of the airways. The other end is covered and has two oblong openings through which the technician can extend his hands (one to hold the tongue and the other to spray the airways). In a previous report, the dispersion of the aerosol generated during intubation was limited to the inner surface of the barrier device during airway intubation.[3 4] We believe that the barrier device should be used by the HCP in addition to the personal protective equipment recommended in the AABIP guidelines while anesthetizing the airways before the procedure.[5] Figure 1 The rectangular barrier box with width of 67 cm (A), height of 62 cm (B), and a depth of 40 cm (C). The barrier box has two oblong holes (width, 5 cm [D]; height 8 cm [E]) over the covered end. The oblong holes facilitate the spraying of lignocaine solution during airway preparation before the procedure Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Barrier Enclosure during Endotracheal Intubation

          To the Editor: Clinicians with inadequate access to standard personal protective equipment (PPE) have been compelled to improvise protective barrier enclosures for use during endotracheal intubation. We describe one such barrier that is easily fabricated and may help protect clinicians during this procedure. The barrier studied was an “aerosol box,” 1 which consists of a transparent plastic cube designed to cover a patient’s head and that incorporates two circular ports through which the clinician’s hands are passed to perform the airway procedure. The dimensions of the box are provided in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org. In our simulation (see video), a laryngoscopist, attired in standard PPE, took position at the head of an airway mannequin. To approximate a forceful cough and generate a spread of droplets and aerosols, a small latex balloon containing 10 ml of fluorescent dye was placed in the hypopharynx of the mannequin. The balloon was inflated with compressed oxygen that was run through tubing inside the mannequin until the balloon burst; the explosion of the balloon represented a crude simulation of a cough. We repeated the experiment without and with the aerosol box, and after each simulation, we illuminated the scene with ultraviolet light to visualize the spreading of the dye. With the use of PPE only, dye was found on the laryngoscopist’s gown, gloves, face mask, eye shield, hair, neck, ears, and shoes (Figure 1). Contamination of the floor occurred within approximately 1 m from the head of the bed and also on a monitor located more than 2 m away. When we repeated the experiment with the aerosol box, the simulated cough resulted in contamination of only the inner surface of the box and the laryngoscopist’s gloves and gowned forearms. Examination of the laryngoscopist and the room with ultraviolet light showed no macroscopic contamination outside the box. Our simulation method, although pragmatic, was not validated for the projectile direction, speed, or turbulence of a true cough, nor did it match the particle-size distribution. Droplets were overproduced as compared with aerosols. Our method of detection could not identify very small quantities of material that could be infectious. Nevertheless, we suggest that our ad hoc barrier enclosure provided a modicum of additional protection and could be considered to be an adjunct to standard PPE. A caveat: we found that the box restricted hand movement and would require training before use in the treatment of patients. Operators should be ready to abandon use of the box should airway management prove difficult.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            American Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (AABIP) Statement on the Use of Bronchoscopy and Respiratory Specimen Collection in Patients With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19 Infection

            To the Editor: Considering the global spread of COVID-19 infection and the increased number of confirmed COVID-19 cases across the United States, the American Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (AABIP) is issuing this statement on the safe and effective use of bronchoscopy in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. The main purpose of this statement is to ensure the safety of our patients, health care team and community at large. We are releasing these urgent recommendations to guide clinicians around the world with the understanding that new information may subsequently modify or impact these current recommendations. We will strive to update this statement as needed in a timely fashion. This document is based on the latest Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommendations March 9, 2020 and expert consensus of the AABIP COVID-19 Task Force. General Recommendations for collection of respiratory specimen collection for suspected COVID-19:1–4 Collection of upper respiratory samples via nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs is the primary and preferred method for diagnosis. Respiratory specimen collection is recommended in suspected COVID-19 regardless of time of onset of symptoms. Induced sputum collection is NOT recommended. Because it is an aerosol generating procedure that poses substantial risk to patients and staff, bronchoscopy should have an extremely limited role in the diagnosis of COVID-19 and only be considered in intubated patients if upper respiratory samples are negative and other diagnosis is considered that would significantly change clinical management. Alternative respiratory specimen collection in the intubated patient can include tracheal aspirates and nonbronchoscopic alveolar lavage. If bronchoscopy is being performed for COVID-19 sample collection, a minimum of 2-3 mL of specimen into a sterile, leak proof container for specimen collection is recommended.4 Only essential personnel should be present when performing any specimen collection. Alert laboratory personnel regarding COVID-19 specimen processing and testing. Additional Considerations for Respiratory Evaluation: Constellation of fever, respiratory symptoms, and radiographic evidence of ground glass opacities and pneumonitis should raise clinical suspicion of COVID-19.5,6 Patients demonstrating such symptoms or findings should be queried about personal history of recent travel to any country with a CDC level 2 or higher travel warning (currently China, Italy, Iran, South Korea, and Japan), contact with a confirmed COVID-19 person or contact with others with such travel history. Clinicians should consider the local prevalence of COVID-19 cases when evaluating the clinical risk for COVID-19 infection, understanding that a travel or exposure history will become increasingly ineffective in identifying patients at risk for infection. Guidelines for respiratory and contact isolation should be followed in all known or suspected cases of COVID-19 infections. Evaluate for influenza and respiratory syncytial virus as well as other respiratory pathogens and additional diagnoses as clinically indicated. For all suspected COVID-19 cases notify internal institutional infection control personnel and state or local public health department. General Personnel Preparation if Bronchoscopy is needed in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection: Place patient in Airborne Infection Isolation Room negative pressure room isolation. All personnel should wear a powered, Air-Purifying Respirator or N95 mask and eye protection. All personnel should wear standard Personal Protective Equipment which includes gown, gloves, respiratory protection, and eye protection. Follow CDC instructions for proper donning and doffing of all protective equipment and disposable devices (www.cdc.gov/hai/prevent/ppe.html). Disposable bronchoscopes should be used first line when available. Follow standard disinfection protocol of durable reusable video monitors. Follow standard high-level disinfection for reusable bronchoscopes. Limit to essential medical personnel during the procedure and specimen collection. General Precautions for performing non-urgent bronchoscopy among patients WITHOUT suspected COVID-19 infection: All patients presenting for previously scheduled bronchoscopy should be asked about their recent travel history before entering the bronchoscopy suite. Bronchoscopy should be postponed if the patient has a history of recent travel to any country with a CDC level 2 or higher travel warning (currently China, Italy, Iran, South Korea, and Japan). All patients should be asked about any fever or ongoing infectious or respiratory symptoms before bronchoscopy. Procedures should be postponed if possible until such symptoms have resolved or testing (if available) is negative. If procedures cannot be postponed as determined by the clinical indication, the procedure should be performed using the precautions as outlined above for bronchoscopy in suspected COVID-19 infection. In communities with high prevalence of COVID-19 infections, even for routine bronchoscopies in asymptomatic patients, proper isolation precautions should be adhered to while also limiting the number of personnel to essential personnel present in either the bronchoscopy suite or operating room suite with negative pressure room settings or designated isolation room (Airborne Infection Isolation Room). Indications for Bronchoscopy in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infections: Bronchoscopy is relatively CONTRAINDICATED in patients with suspected and confirmed COVID-19 infections. The only role for bronchoscopy would be when less invasive testing to confirm COVID-19 are inconclusive, suspicion for an alternative diagnosis that would impact clinical management is suspected, or an urgent life-saving intervention as cited below. Bronchoscopy for any elective reason should be postponed until after full recovery and the patient is declared free of infection. Elective indications include a lung mass, bronchial mass, mediastinal or hilar lymphadenopathy, lung infiltrates, and mild to moderate airway stenosis. If immediate testing is not available, bronchoscopy should be deferred if possible. Bronchoscopy (flexible and rigid) for urgent/emergent reasons should be considered only if a lifesaving bronchoscopic intervention is deemed necessary. Indications include massive hemoptysis, benign or malignant severe airway stenosis or suspicion of an alternative or secondary infectious etiology or malignant condition with resultant significant endobronchial obstruction. Information contained in this document will be updated regularly as new information becomes available. For the latest version, please visit https://aabronchology.org/. Momen M. Wahidi Carla Lamb, MD, MBA Septimiu Murgu, MD Ali Musani, MD Samira Shojaee, MD Ashutosh Sachdeva, MD Fabien Maldonado, MD Kamran Mahmood, MD Matthew Kinsey, MD Sonali Sethi, MD Amit Mahajan, MD Adnan Majid, MD Colleen Keyes, MD Abdul H. Alraiyes, MD Arthur Sung, MD David Hsia, MD George Eapen, MD ■■■■
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              A survey of flexible bronchoscopy practices in India: The Indian bronchoscopy survey (2017)

              Background: There is a lack of contemporaneous data on the practices of flexible bronchoscopy in India. Aim: The aim of the study was to study the prevalent practices of flexible bronchoscopy across India. Methods: The “Indian Bronchoscopy Survey” was a 98-question, online survey structured into the following sections: general information, patient preparation and monitoring, sedation and topical anesthesia, procedural/technical aspects, and bronchoscope disinfection/staff protection. Results: Responses from 669 bronchoscopists (mean age: 40.2 years, 91.8% adult pulmonologists) were available for analysis. Approximately, 70,000 flexible bronchoscopy examinations had been performed over the preceding year. A majority (59%) of bronchoscopists were performing bronchoscopy without sedation. A large number (45%) of bronchoscopists had learned the procedure outside of their fellowship training. About 55% used anticholinergic premedication either as a routine or occasionally. Nebulized lignocaine was being used by 72%, while 24% utilized transtracheal administration of lignocaine. The most commonly (75%) used concentration of lignocaine was 2%. Midazolam with or without fentanyl was the preferred agent for intravenous sedation. The use of video bronchoscope was common (80.8%). The most common (94%) route for performing bronchoscopy was nasal. Conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) was being performed by 74%, while 92% and 78% performed endobronchial and transbronchial lung biopsy, respectively. Therapeutic airway interventions (stents, electrocautery, cryotherapy, and others) were being performed by 30%, while endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) and rigid bronchoscopy were performed by 27% and 19.5%, respectively. Conclusion: There is a wide national variation in the practices of performing flexible bronchoscopy. However, there has been a considerable improvement in bronchoscopy practices compared to previous national surveys.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Lung India
                Lung India
                LI
                Lung India : Official Organ of Indian Chest Society
                Wolters Kluwer - Medknow (India )
                0970-2113
                0974-598X
                Sep-Oct 2020
                31 August 2020
                : 37
                : 5
                : 463-464
                Affiliations
                [1] Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India E-mail: agarwal.ritesh@ 123456outlook.in
                Article
                LI-37-463
                10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_482_20
                7857380
                32883917
                bfb30046-3f34-45d1-aa2f-ffd5be596ddc
                Copyright: © 2020 Indian Chest Society

                This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

                History
                : 13 June 2020
                : 14 June 2020
                Categories
                Research Letters

                Respiratory medicine
                Respiratory medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article