Does a surgical mask improve oxygenation in COVID-19 patients?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Matsui Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8045437 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 poses a risk to the endoscopic skull base surgeon. Significant efforts to improving safety have been employed, including the use of personal protective equipment, preoperative COVID-19 testing, and recently the use of a modified surgical mask barrier.ObjectiveTo reduce the risks of pathogen transmission during endoscopic skull base surgery.MethodsThis study was exempt from Institutional Review Board approval. Our study utilizes a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed mask with an anterior aperture fitted with a surgical glove with ports designed to allow for surgical instrumentation and side ports to accommodate suction ventilation and an endotracheal tube. As an alternative, a modified laparoscopic surgery trocar served as a port for instruments, and, on the contralateral side, rubber tubing was used over the endoscrub endosheath to create an airtight seal. Surgical freedom and aerosolization were tested in both modalities.ResultsThe ventilated mask allowed for excellent surgical maneuverability and freedom. The trocar system was effective for posterior surgical procedures, allowing access to critical paramedian structures, and afforded a superior surgical seal, but was limited in terms of visualization and maneuverability during anterior approaches. Aerosolization was reduced using both the mask and nasal trocar.ConclusionThe ventilated upper airway endoscopic procedure mask allows for a sealed surgical barrier during endoscopic skull base surgery and may play a critical role in advancing skull base surgery in the COVID-19 era. The nasal trocar may be a useful alternative in instances where 3D printing is not available. Additional studies are needed to validate these preliminary findings.
| S-EPMC7534784 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeInvestigating the effect of different face masks on dry eye disease (DED) among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis was a comparative, cross-sectional study. Participants were included into two groups: group 1 (n = 30) wore surgical masks, and group 2 (n = 30) wore N95 masks with face shields. Demographic and ocular surface disease index questionnaires (OSDI) were performed. In addition, Tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal and conjunctival fluorescein staining, and meibography to assess meibomian gland loss (MGL) were performed on all participants. Independent T-test was used to compare continuous parameters and Chi-square test for categorical variables. The relationship between continuous variables was tested using bivariate Pearson correlation.ResultsSixty healthcare workers participated in this study (36 females and 24 males). The mean (±SD) age of the surgical mask and N95 groups was 35.33 (±14.94) and 36.63 (±10.64) years, respectively. Both masks caused dryness according to TBUT, MGL, and OSDI scores. DED per DEWS II definition was observed in 14 (46.7%) and 16 (53.3%) patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Comparing the two groups, N95 mask caused significantly more dryness according to TBUT (P = 0.042) and fluorescein staining (P = 0.038 for the right eye and P = 0.015 for the left eye).ConclusionPhysicians should be aware of the potential dry eye signs secondary to face mask wear during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further attention should be taken in patients who suffer from preexisting dry eye syndrome and in patients who undergo intraocular operations.
| S-EPMC9114619 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST416 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundVeno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) support is increasingly used in the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the clinical decision-making to initiate V-V ECMO for severe COVID-19 still remains unclear. In order to determine the optimal timing and patient selection, we investigated the outcomes of both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients undergoing V-V ECMO support.MethodsOverall, 138 patients were included in this study. Patients were stratified into two cohorts: those with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS.ResultsThe survival in patients with COVID-19 was statistically similar to non-COVID-19 patients (p = .16). However, the COVID-19 group demonstrated higher rates of bleeding (p = .03) and thrombotic complications (p < .001). The duration of V-V ECMO support was longer in COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-19 patients (29.0 ± 27.5 vs 15.9 ± 19.6 days, p < .01). Most notably, in contrast to the non-COVID-19 group, we found that COVID-19 patients who had been on a ventilator for longer than 7 days prior to ECMO had 100% mortality without a lung transplant.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that COVID-19-associated ARDS was not associated with a higher post-ECMO mortality than non-COVID-19-associated ARDS patients, despite longer duration of extracorporeal support. Early initiation of V-V ECMO is important for improved ECMO outcomes in COVID-19 ARDS patients. Since late initiation of ECMO was associated with extremely high mortality related to lack of pulmonary recovery, it should be used judiciously or as a bridge to lung transplantation.
| S-EPMC8653196 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn the absence of specific treatment, preventive strategies are of paramount importance in management of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) pandemic. We estimated cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions such as hand-hygiene, surgical-mask N-95 respirators and surgical mask in general population.MethodsWe performed a decision tree and markov-model based economic evaluation. We estimated total costs and outcomes from public payer's perspective, based on information available through systematic literature search on relative intervention effect during early pandemic phase. We estimated outcomes as number COVID-19 prevented and Quality Adjusted life year (QALY) over one-year time-horizon with one-day cycle-length. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) was calculated multiple sensitivity analyses were applied to assess parameter uncertainty.ResultsUse of surgical mask with hand hygiene, fit tested N-95 respirator, surgical-mask, non-fit tested N-95 and hand-hygiene interventions prevented additional 1139, 1124, 1121, 1043 and 975 COVID-19 cases per-million as compared to using none. Additional costs incurred (in billion) were ₹29.78 ($0.40), ₹148.09 ($1.99), ₹72.51 ($0.98), ₹26.84 ($0.36) and ₹2.48 ($0.03) as well as additional QALYs gained were 357.4, 353.01, 327.95, 351.52 and 307.04 for surgical mask with hand hygiene, fit-tested N-95, non-fit-tested N-95, surgical mask and hand-hygiene respectively. ICERs with surgical with hand hygiene, hand-hygiene alone, surgical-mask alone, N-95 respirator fit and non-fit test were 83.32($1.12), 8.07($0.11), 76.36($1.03), 419.51($5.65) and 221.10 ($2.98) million ₹ ($)/QALY respectively. Results were robust on uncertainty analysis.DiscussionAmong the non-pharmacological interventions to be considered for preventing spread of COVID-19, hand hygiene was cost-effective and avoidance of use of surgical masks and respirators by the general public could save resources.
| S-EPMC7859732 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8401362 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To investigate the ICU survival of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients suffering from COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) versus ECMO patients without COVID-19 (non-COVID-19)-related ARDS.DesignPreliminary analysis of data from two prospective ECMO trials and retrospective analysis of a cohort of ARDS ECMO patients.SettingSingle-center ICU.PatientsAdult ARDS ECMO patients, 16 COVID-19 versus 23 non-COVID-19 patients. Analysis of retrospective data from 346 adult ARDS ECMO patients.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsCOVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS patients did not differ with respect to preexisting disease or body mass index. ICU survival rate was 62% for COVID-19 ECMO patients and 70% for non-COVID-19 ECMO patients. COVID-19 ECMO survivors were supported with ECMO for a median of 43 days (interquartile range [IQR], 18-58 d) versus 16 days (IQR, 19-39 d; p = 0.03) for non-COVID-19 patients. The median duration of ECMO therapy for all ARDS patients between 2007 and 2018 was 15 days (IQR, 6-28 d). The subgroup of patients suffering from any viral pneumonia received ECMO support for a median of 16 days (IQR, 9-27 d), survivors of influenza pneumonia received ECMO support for 13 days (IQR, 7-25 d).ConclusionsCOVID-19 patients required significant longer ECMO support compared with patients without COVID-19 to achieve successful ECMO weaning and ICU survival.
| S-EPMC8966959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emergency departments are facing an unprecedented challenge in dealing with patients who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The massive number of cases evolving to respiratory failure are leading to a rapid depletion of medical resources such as respiratory support equipment, which is more critical in low- and middle-income countries. In this context, any therapeutic and oxygenation support strategy that conserves medical resources should be welcomed. Prone positioning is a well-known ventilatory support strategy to improve oxygenation levels. Self-proning can be used in the management of selected patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Here, we describe our experience with two COVID-19-positive patients who were admitted with respiratory failure. The patients were successfully managed with self-proning and noninvasive oxygenation without the need for intubation.
| S-EPMC7236748 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Long-term care facilities are a recognized high-risk setting for severe outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. This study describes a COVID-19 outbreak in a long-term care facility in Japan. The index case was a nurse who wore a surgical mask and used standard precautions. Of the 17 confirmed cases of COVID-19, 14 (14/93, 15.1%) were residents and three (3/69, 4.3%) were healthcare personnel (HCP); no visitors tested positive 0 (0/22, 0.0%). Mask utilization by HCP was not much effective in preventing COVID-19 transmission, even when interaction was not considered as being in close contact.
| S-EPMC7921340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMask-wearing caused significant reductions in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission. We aimed to determine whether face mask-wearing during exercise caused reductions in peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and whether it affected secondary physiological measures [end-tidal carbon dioxide (EtCO2), respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), expired breath temperature (EBT)]. Subjective measurements included ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), ratings of perceived breathlessness (RPB), and symptomology.MethodsA randomised cross-over trial examined no mask (NM), surgical mask (SM) and a buff mask (BM). Thirty participants (30-45 years) cycled at 60% power output for 30 min in three exercise sessions, 24 h apart, within 6 days. Each session recorded all measures at resting baseline (T0), 9 min (T1), 18 min (T2), and 27 min (T3). Dependent statistical tests determined significant differences between masks and time-points.ResultsSpO2 decreased for SM and BM between T0 compared to T1, T2 and T3 (all P<0.005). BM caused significant reductions at T1 and T2 compared to NM (P<0.001 and P=0.018). Significant changes in EtCO2 and EBT occurred throughout exercise and between exercise stages for all mask conditions (P<0.001). As expected for moderate intensity exercise, RR and HR were significantly higher during exercise compared to T0 (P<0.001). RPB significantly increased for each condition at each time point (P<0.001). RPE was not significant between mask conditions at any exercise stage.ConclusionsSM and BM caused a mild but sustained reduction in SpO2 at commencement of exercise, which did not worsen throughout short (<30 min) moderate intensity exercise. Level of perception was similar, suggesting healthy people can wear masks during moderate exercise and activities of daily living.
| S-EPMC11009602 | biostudies-literature