2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      In Reply: Precautions for Endoscopic Transnasal Skull Base Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

      reply
      , MD, MsC 1 , , MD 2 , , MD, PhD 1
      Neurosurgery
      Oxford University Press

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          To the Editor: The COVID-19 pandemic crisis has been defying health professionals and managers at all levels. Due to the risk of health system overload, there is an unpaired need to infrastructure, human, and economic resource allocation management. At a time when global attention is focused on the pandemic, we should not overlook that people continue to face other health problems. The incidents of trauma and accidental injury tend to decrease due to social distancing, quarantine, or locking. However, other diseases, such as stroke and neoplasms, inexorably follow their natural course. The correspondence published by Patel et al 1 draws attention to the potential risks of endonasal endoscopic surgery in COVID-19 diagnosed or suspected patients and the need for surgical practice provisional update. Based on personal communication, it reports, in a narrative fashion, a series of cases of health worker contamination related to the care of patients undergoing endoscopic endonasal surgery despite the best efforts to perform a safe surgery. Similar incidents occurred in several reference services around the world. The authors emphasize the need for adequate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in cases tested positive for COVID-19—although it questions the sensitivity and specificity of such tests—and recommend limiting the number of professionals during procedures only to the essential ones. Since the pandemic breakthrough in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, thousands of health workers have been infected during the care of patients with COVID-19. The high viral load in the upper airways of infected patients poses a greater risk during endoscopic endonasal procedures, especially when high-speed drilling is needed, which increases the production of aerosols and the suspension of viral particles in the environment. 2 It is very clear within the neurosurgical community that protocols should be planned to determine which neurosurgical cases must be prioritized. Such protocols should consider the urgency status and type of the procedure, the need and length of postoperative intensive care support, and the preoperative testing of patients when possible. Burke et al 3 and Ramakrishna et al 4 demonstrate in a pragmatic way how to implement such stratification initiatives. Moreover, given the potential shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) and ward beds, there is an opportunity to foster the ongoing phenomenon of adoption of quality improvement programs such as the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS). The ERAS implementation initiatives have shown improved patient outcomes while reducing length of stay and costs. 5 Thus, the postponement of endoscopic endonasal neurosurgical procedures seems feasible and, in the current scenario, an appropriate solution. Disclosures The authors have no personal, financial, or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this article.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

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

          Safety and efficacy of a novel neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for elective craniotomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial

          Although enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have gained acceptance in various surgical specialties, no established neurosurgical ERAS protocol for patients undergoing elective craniotomy has been reported in the literature. Here, the authors describe the design, implementation, safety, and efficacy of a novel neurosurgical ERAS protocol for elective craniotomy in a tertiary care medical center located in China. A multidisciplinary neurosurgical ERAS protocol for elective craniotomy was developed based on the best available evidence. A total of 140 patients undergoing elective craniotomy between October 2016 and May 2017 were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial comparing this novel protocol to conventional neurosurgical perioperative management. The primary endpoint of this study was the postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). Postoperative morbidity, perioperative complications, postoperative pain scores, postoperative nausea and vomiting, duration of urinary catheterization, time to first solid meal, and patient satisfaction were secondary endpoints. The median postoperative hospital LOS (4 days) was significantly shorter with the incorporation of the ERAS protocol than that with conventional perioperative management (7 days, p < 0.0001). No 30-day readmission or reoperation occurred in either group. More patients in the ERAS group reported mild pain (visual analog scale score 1–3) on postoperative day 1 than those in the control group (79% vs. 33%, OR 7.49, 95% CI 3.51–15.99, p < 0.0001). Similarly, more patients in the ERAS group had a shortened duration of pain (1–2 days; 53% vs. 17%, OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.29–1.37, p = 0.0001). The urinary catheter was removed within 6 hours after surgery in 74% patients in the ERAS group (OR 400.1, 95% CI 23.56–6796, p < 0.0001). The time to first oral liquid intake was a median of 8 hours in the ERAS group compared to 11 hours in the control group (p < 0.0001), and solid food intake occurred at a median of 24 hours in the ERAS group compared to 72 hours in the control group (p < 0.0001). This multidisciplinary, evidence-based, neurosurgical ERAS protocol for elective craniotomy appears to have significant benefits over conventional perioperative management. Implementation of ERAS is associated with a significant reduction in the postoperative hospital stay and an acceleration in recovery, without increasing complication rates related to elective craniotomy. Further evaluation of this protocol in large multicenter studies is warranted. Clinical trial registration no.: ChiCTR-INR-16009662 (chictr.org.cn)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Letter: the coronavirus disease 2019 global pandemic: a neurosurgical treatment algorithm

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

              Endonasal instrumentation and aerosolization risk in the era of COVID-19: simulation, literature review, and proposed mitigation strategies.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Neurosurgery
                Neurosurgery
                neurosurgery
                Neurosurgery
                Oxford University Press
                0148-396X
                1524-4040
                15 May 2020
                : nyaa222
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Unidade Neuro-Músculo-Esquelética Serviço de Neurocirurgia Complexo Hospitalar Universitário Professor Edgard Santos Federal University of Bahia Salvador , Brazil
                [2 ] Department of Neurology Division of Neurosurgery University of São Paulo São Paulo , Brazil
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5299-8365
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5092-6595
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8514-7631
                Article
                nyaa222
                10.1093/neuros/nyaa222
                7239093
                32413133
                fd4c3bd2-0ace-43d3-9f25-398ed4451c85
                Copyright © 2020 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

                This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.

                History
                Page count
                Pages: 1
                Categories
                Correspondence
                AcademicSubjects/MED00930
                Neuros/15
                Custom metadata
                PAP

                Comments

                Comment on this article