Cargando…
Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures
OBJECTIVE: Cadaveric simulations have shown endonasal drilling and cautery generate aerosols, which is a significant concern for otolaryngologists during the COVID‐19 era. This study quantifies aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures in live patients. METHODS:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33614929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lio2.520 |
_version_ | 1783651247701622784 |
---|---|
author | Sharma, Dhruv Campiti, Vincent J. Ye, Michael J. Rubel, Kolin E. Higgins, Thomas S. Wu, Arthur W. Shipchandler, Taha Z. Burgin, Sarah J. Sim, Michael W. Illing, Elisa A. Park, Jae Hong Ting, Jonathan Y. |
author_facet | Sharma, Dhruv Campiti, Vincent J. Ye, Michael J. Rubel, Kolin E. Higgins, Thomas S. Wu, Arthur W. Shipchandler, Taha Z. Burgin, Sarah J. Sim, Michael W. Illing, Elisa A. Park, Jae Hong Ting, Jonathan Y. |
author_sort | Sharma, Dhruv |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Cadaveric simulations have shown endonasal drilling and cautery generate aerosols, which is a significant concern for otolaryngologists during the COVID‐19 era. This study quantifies aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures in live patients. METHODS: Aerosols ranging from 0.30 to 10.0 μm were measured in real‐time using an optical particle sizer during surgeries and in‐office procedures. Various mask conditions were tested during rigid nasal endoscopy (RNE) and postoperative debridement (POD). RESULTS: Higher aerosol concentrations (AC) ranging from 2.69 to 10.0 μm were measured during RNE (n = 9) with no mask vs two mask conditions (P = .002 and P = .017). Mean AC (0.30‐10.0 μm) were significantly higher during POD (n = 9) for no mask vs a mask covering the patient's mouth condition (mean difference = 0.16 ± 0.03 particles/cm(3), 95% CI 0.10‐0.22, P < .001). There were no discernible spikes in aerosol levels during endoscopic septoplasty (n = 3). Aerosol spikes were measured in two of three functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (FESS) with microdebrider. Using suction mitigation, there were no discernible spikes during powered drilling in two anterior skull base surgeries (ASBS). CONCLUSION: Use of a surgical mask over the patient's mouth during in‐office procedures or a mask with a slit for an endoscope during RNE significantly diminished aerosol generation. However, whether this reduction in aerosol generation is sufficient to prevent transmission of communicable diseases via aerosols was beyond the scope of this study. There were several spikes in aerosols during FESS and ASBS, though none were associated with endonasal drilling with the use of suction mitigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7883622 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78836222021-02-19 Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures Sharma, Dhruv Campiti, Vincent J. Ye, Michael J. Rubel, Kolin E. Higgins, Thomas S. Wu, Arthur W. Shipchandler, Taha Z. Burgin, Sarah J. Sim, Michael W. Illing, Elisa A. Park, Jae Hong Ting, Jonathan Y. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol Allergy, Rhinology, and Immunology OBJECTIVE: Cadaveric simulations have shown endonasal drilling and cautery generate aerosols, which is a significant concern for otolaryngologists during the COVID‐19 era. This study quantifies aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures in live patients. METHODS: Aerosols ranging from 0.30 to 10.0 μm were measured in real‐time using an optical particle sizer during surgeries and in‐office procedures. Various mask conditions were tested during rigid nasal endoscopy (RNE) and postoperative debridement (POD). RESULTS: Higher aerosol concentrations (AC) ranging from 2.69 to 10.0 μm were measured during RNE (n = 9) with no mask vs two mask conditions (P = .002 and P = .017). Mean AC (0.30‐10.0 μm) were significantly higher during POD (n = 9) for no mask vs a mask covering the patient's mouth condition (mean difference = 0.16 ± 0.03 particles/cm(3), 95% CI 0.10‐0.22, P < .001). There were no discernible spikes in aerosol levels during endoscopic septoplasty (n = 3). Aerosol spikes were measured in two of three functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (FESS) with microdebrider. Using suction mitigation, there were no discernible spikes during powered drilling in two anterior skull base surgeries (ASBS). CONCLUSION: Use of a surgical mask over the patient's mouth during in‐office procedures or a mask with a slit for an endoscope during RNE significantly diminished aerosol generation. However, whether this reduction in aerosol generation is sufficient to prevent transmission of communicable diseases via aerosols was beyond the scope of this study. There were several spikes in aerosols during FESS and ASBS, though none were associated with endonasal drilling with the use of suction mitigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2021-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7883622/ /pubmed/33614929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lio2.520 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of The Triological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Allergy, Rhinology, and Immunology Sharma, Dhruv Campiti, Vincent J. Ye, Michael J. Rubel, Kolin E. Higgins, Thomas S. Wu, Arthur W. Shipchandler, Taha Z. Burgin, Sarah J. Sim, Michael W. Illing, Elisa A. Park, Jae Hong Ting, Jonathan Y. Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title | Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title_full | Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title_fullStr | Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title_full_unstemmed | Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title_short | Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
title_sort | aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in‐office procedures |
topic | Allergy, Rhinology, and Immunology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33614929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lio2.520 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sharmadhruv aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT campitivincentj aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT yemichaelj aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT rubelkoline aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT higginsthomass aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT wuarthurw aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT shipchandlertahaz aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT burginsarahj aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT simmichaelw aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT illingelisaa aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT parkjaehong aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures AT tingjonathany aerosolgenerationduringroutinerhinologicsurgeriesandinofficeprocedures |