Smoke Evacuation System Research Articles

Use of current automatic smoke evacuation system in flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy: Its feasibility and potential usefulness.

Flexible endoscopy does not have a system that can automatically evacuate surgical smoke generated in the gastrointestinal lumen. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and potential usefulness of automatic smoke evacuation systems in flexible endoscopy. [Bench] After surgical smoke generated in the stomach was evacuated by the evacuator, the degree of residual smoke and gastric luminal collapse were evaluated to optimize the evacuator settings. [Animal] Insufflation, suction, and total operation time to complete the protocol of 10 cauterizations of the gastric mucosa were measured in three groups: "manual suction only," "manual suction with automatic evacuation (50% force)," and "manual suction with automatic evacuation (70% force)." The stability of endoscopic visualization and operability was evaluated by 10 endoscopists blinded to those suction settings, and the number of manual suctions, insufflations, and total operation time were measured. [Bench] The degree of residual smoke and gastric luminal collapse were inversely correlated. [Animal] When the automatic evacuator was partially used, there was no difference in the insufflation time, but the suction time (vs 50%; p = 0.011, vs. 70%; p = 0.011) and total operation time (vs. 50%; p = 0.012, vs. 70%; p = 0.036) were significantly reduced compared to manual operation only. Furthermore, manual suction with automatic evacuation (50% force) significantly improved the stability of endoscopic visualization and operability compared to manual operation only (p = 0.041, p = 0.0085). The automatic smoke evacuation in flexible gastrointestinal endoscopy was potentially feasible and useful by improving the device setting.

Surgical smoke: a matter of hygiene, toxicology, and occupational health.

The use of devices for tissue dissection and hemostasis during surgery is almost unavoidable. Electrically powered devices such as electrocautery, ultrasonic and laser units produce surgical smoke containing more than a thousand different products of combustion. These include large amounts of carcinogenic, mutagenic and potentially teratogenic noxae. The smoke contains particles that range widely in size, even as small as 0.007 µm. Most of the particles (90%) in electrocautery smoke are ≤6.27 µm in size, but surgical masks cannot filter particles smaller than 5 µm. In this situation, 95% of the smoke particles which pass through the mask reach deep into the respiratory tract and frequently cause various symptoms, such as headache, dizziness, nausea, eye and respiratory tract irritation, weakness, and abdominal pain in the acute period. The smoke can transport bacteria and viruses that are mostly between 0.02 µm and 3 µm in size and there is a risk of contamination. Among these viruses, SARS-CoV-2, influenza virus, HIV, HPV, HBV must be considered. The smoke may also carry malignant cells. The long-term effects of the surgical smoke are always ignored, because causality can hardly be clarified in individual cases. The quantity of the smoke changes with the technique of the surgeon, the room ventilation system, the characteristics of the power device used, the energy level at which it is set, and the characteristics of the tissue processed. The surgical team is highly exposed to the smoke, with the surgeon experiencing the highest exposure. However, the severity of exposure differs according to certain factors, e.g., ventilation by laminar or turbulent mixed airflow or smoke evacuation system. In any case, the surgical smoke must be removed from the operation area. The most effective method is to collect the smoke from the source through an aspiration system and to evacuate it outside. Awareness and legal regulations in terms of hygiene, toxicology, as well as occupational health and safety should increase.

Nanoparticle Concentration in Surgical Plume During Tonsillectomy: A Comparison of Four Techniques.

Surgical plume has known potential occupational health hazards. This study compares nanoparticle concentrations in surgical plumes generated between different pediatric tonsillectomy surgical techniques and assesses the efficacy of mitigation measures. This is a cross-sectional study performed at a tertiary care academic center. Extracapsular or intracapsular tonsillectomy was performed in 60 patients using four techniques and in 10 additional patients using mitigation measures. Two nanoparticle counters were used to measure particulate concentrations: CPC™ and DiSCmini™. Tonsillectomy techniques included: (1) microdebrider (MD), (2) Bovie with manual suctioning by an assistant (B), (3) Bovie with built-in smoke evacuation system (BS), and (4) Coblator™ (CB). An additional Yankauer suction was used in the mitigation groups (BSY) and (CBY). Comparative analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA on ranks and pairwise comparisons between the groups. The mean concentrations (particles/cm3) and coefficient of variants for the DiSCmini particulate counter were MD: 5140 (1.6), B: 30700 (1.5), BS: 25001 (0.8), CB: 54814 (1.7), CBY: 2395 (1.3) and BSY: 11552 (1.0). Mean concentrations for the CPC particulate counter were MD: 1223 (1.4), B: 3405 (0.7), BS: 5002 (0.9), CB: 13273 (1.0), CBY: 1048 (1.2) and BSY: 3046 (0.6). The lowest mean concentrations were noted in cases using MD and the highest in cases using CB. However, after mitigation, CBY had the lowest overall levels. Tonsillectomy technique does impact the levels of nanoparticles emitted within the surgical plume, which may present an occupational hazard for operating room personnel. 3 Laryngoscope, 134:2444-2448, 2024.

Synergic evacuation device helps smoke control during endoscopic thyroid surgery

BackgroundSurgical plumes in small cavities, such as transoral endoscopic thyroid surgery, have never been satisfactorily resolved. We aimed to study the use of a smoke evacuation system and evaluate its efficacy, including the field of view and operating time. Study DesignWe retrospectively reviewed 327 consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy. They were separated into 2 groups based on whether the smoke evacuation system was used. To reduce the possible experience bias, only patients 4 months before and after implementing the evacuation system were included. Recorded endoscopic videos were evaluated, including the field of view, the incidence of scope clearance, and time spent during air-pocket creation. ResultsOverall, there were 64 patients with a median age of 43.59 years and a median body mass index of 22.87 kg/m2, including 54 women, 21 thyroid cancers, and 61 hemithyroidectomies. The operative duration was comparable between the groups. The group where the evacuation system was used scored more as good in terms of endoscopic views (8/32, 25% vs 1/32, 3.13%, P = .01), fewer incidences of endoscope lens pull out for clearance (3.5 vs 6.0 times, P < .01), less time for clear view after energy device activation (2.67 vs 5.00 seconds, P < .01), and less time spent (8.67 vs 12.38 minutes, P < .01) during air-pocket creation. ConclusionIn conjunction with the synergy function of energy devices, evacuators enhance the field of view and optimize the time spent in the real clinical setting of low-pressure and small-space endoscopic thyroid procedures, in addition to the benefit of reducing smoke harm.

Revisiting Tonsillectomy Practices in the Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic

With the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak, a limited healthcare force catered to an ever-increasing number of COVID-19 patients on top of non-COVID-19 patients. Over two years after the pandemic, it is evident that medical practice must adapt to COVID-19 to ensure the provision of undeterred, quality medical care. This review intends to re-evaluate the Tonsillectomy protocols that we employed during COVID-19 and explore ways in which we might improve the safety of this frequently performed surgery even after the pandemic. A decrease in the frequency of tonsillitis was observed as lockdown and strict social distancing protocols were followed. Thus, it is concluded that tonsillectomies may be deferred unless urgent and in the best interest of the patient and medical workforce. However, when surgery is necessary, new mitigation strategies, like preoperative COVID-19 screening, minimizing intra-operative staff, widespread use of personal protective equipment (PPE), negative pressure operating rooms, and reducing postoperative hospital stay need to be incorporated into the safety protocols of airway surgeries and minimize aerosolization such as using SES (smoke evacuation system) during surgery and TORS (trans-oral robotic surgery). This narrative review covers an extensive literature review of papers on PubMed, Google Scholar and Medline that highlight the impact of the Pandemic on the surgical practice in patients of recurrent tonsillitis since December 2019. Keywords: Tonsillitis; Tonsillectomy; COVID-19; SARS-COV-2; Health Policy; Surgical Policy.

Laser-Induced Smoke in Dermatologic Practice: A Survey to Explore Hazard Perceptions, Safety Measures and Unmet Needs.

Introduction: Inhalation of laser-induced smoke is a potential health hazard to exposed physicians and laser operators. To date, little is known about the perception of health hazards related to laser-induced smoke exposure among physicians and the actual use of safety measures to mitigate these risks. Methods: In May 2020, 514 members of the European Society for Lasers and Energy-Based Devices (ESLD) were invited by email to participate in an online survey. The survey comprised 16 questions including multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Results: Responses were received from 109 participants. The majority (90%) were aware of potential hazards and highlighted a desire for better protective measures (60%). A smoke evacuation system was frequently used with ablative lasers (66%) and fractional ablative lasers (61%), but less the case with non-ablative lasers (30%) and hair removal lasers (28%). The COVID-19 outbreak had no clear effect on the use of smoke evacuation systems. Prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, mainly surgical masks were used (40-57%), while high filtration masks (FFP1, FFP2 or FFP3) were used by only a small percentage (15-30%). Post COVID-19 outbreak, the use of high filtration masks increased significantly (54-66%), predominately due to an increase in the use of FFP2 masks. Reasons mentioned for inadequate protective measures were sparse knowledge, limited availability, discomfort, excessive noise, high room temperatures, and financial costs. Conclusion: While there is considerable awareness of the hazards of laser-induced smoke among physicians and laser operators, a substantial number of them do not use appropriate protective measures. The implementation of regulations on safety measures is hampered by sparse knowledge, limited availability, discomfort, excessive noise, financial issues, and high room temperatures.

Electrocautery smoke exposure and smoke evacuation in thoracic surgery: A prospective randomized study

Abstract Objective Worldwide, health care professionals working in operating rooms (ORs) are exposed to electrocautery smoke on a daily basis. Aims of this study were to determine the composition and concentrations of electrocautery smoke in the OR using mass spectrometry and investigate whether smoke evacuation systems, operative technique and distance to the cautery source are effective in reducing exposure. Methods Single-center study at our thoracic surgical unit including 122 surgical procedures. Besides room air measurements away from the operating table (n=35) and direct breath analysis (n=3), 84 minimally invasive and open procedures were in each group 1:1 computer randomized to smoke evacuation system (SES) versus no SES use and hazardous compounds were measured at the height of the operating surgeons respiratory tract. Results Irritating, toxic, carcinogenic and mutagenic volaticle organic compounds (VOCs) were observed in OR air, with some exceeding permissible exposure limits (OSHA/NIOSH). Mean total concentration of harmful compounds at surgeon height without SES was 273ppb (±189ppb) with a maximum total concentration of harmful substances of 8991ppb . Maximum total VOC concentrations were 1.6±1.2 ppm (minimally-invasive surgery) and 2.1±1.5 ppm (open surgery), and total maximum VOC concentrations were 1.8±1.3 ppm at the OR table and 1.4±1.0 ppm in OR air in general. Neither difference was statistically significant. In open surgery, SES significantly reduced maximum concentrations of specific VOCs at surgeon height, including aromatics and aldehydes. Conclusion Our data indicate relevant exposure of health care professionals to volatile organic compounds in the OR. Surgical technique and distance to cautery devices did not significantly reduce exposure. SES reduced exposure to specific harmful VOC's during open surgery.

Electrocautery smoke exposure and efficacy of smoke evacuation systems in minimally invasive and open surgery: a prospective randomized study

Worldwide, health care professionals working in operating rooms (ORs) are exposed to electrocautery smoke on a daily basis. Aims of this study were to determine composition and concentrations of electrocautery smoke in the OR using mass spectrometry. Prospective observational study at a tertiary care academic center, involving 122 surgical procedures of which 84 were 1:1 computer randomized to smoke evacuation system (SES) versus no SES use. Irritating, toxic, carcinogenic and mutagenic VOCs were observed in OR air, with some exceeding permissible exposure limits (OSHA/NIOSH). Mean total concentration of harmful compounds was 272.69 ppb (± 189 ppb) with a maximum total concentration of harmful substances of 8991 ppb (at surgeon level, no SES). Maximum total VOC concentrations were 1.6 ± 1.2 ppm (minimally-invasive surgery) and 2.1 ± 1.5 ppm (open surgery), and total maximum VOC concentrations were 1.8 ± 1.3 ppm at the OR table ‘at surgeon level’ and 1.4 ± 1.0 ppm ‘in OR room air’ away from the operating table. Neither difference was statistically significant. In open surgery, SES significantly reduced maximum concentrations of specific VOCs at surgeon level, including aromatics and aldehydes. Our data indicate relevant exposure of health care professionals to volatile organic compounds in the OR. Surgical technique and distance to cautery devices did not significantly reduce exposure. SES reduced exposure to specific harmful VOC’s during open surgery.Trial Registration Number: NCT03924206 (clinicaltrials.gov).

SARS-CoV-2 Testing of Aerosols Emitted During Pediatric Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Prospective, Case-Controlled Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented significant safety concerns for healthcare providers, especially those performing aerosol-generating procedures. Several surgical societies issued early warnings that aerosols generated during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) could harbor infectious quantities of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study tested the hypothesis that MIS-aerosols contain SARS-CoV-2. To evaluate SARS-CoV-2 presence in aerosols emitted during intracavitary MIS, children <18 years who required emergent MIS and were discovered to be SARS-CoV-2-positive were enrolled. Swabs were obtained from the port in-line with a filtered smoke evacuation system, the tubing adjacent to this port, the fluid collection chamber and filter, and the distal endotracheal tube (ETT). All swabs were analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 using quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. To evaluate viral distribution in tissues, fluorescence in situ hybridization for SARS-CoV-2 was performed on resected specimens. Outcomes were recorded, and participating healthcare workers were tracked for SARS-CoV-2 conversion. From July 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, 11 children requiring emergent MIS were discovered preoperatively to be SARS-CoV-2 positive (median age: 14 years [5-17]). SARS-CoV-2 was detected only in ETT swabs and not in surgical aerosols or specimens. Median operative time was 56.5 minutes (IQR: 46-66), and postoperative stay was 21.2 hours (IQR: 1.97-57.57). No complications or viral eruption were recorded, and none of 63 healthcare workers tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 6 weeks. SARS-CoV-2 was detected only in ETT secretions and not in surgical aerosols or specimens among a pediatric cohort of asymptomatic patients having emergent MIS.

Surgical smoke: modern mobile smoke evacuation systems improve occupational safety in the operating theatre.

OBJECTIVESEvaluation of smoke capture efficiency of different mobile smoke evacuation devices with respect to volatile organic compounds and their noise emission.METHODSElectrosurgical incisions were performed on fresh porcine liver in an operating room with vertical laminar flow. The generated surgical smoke was analysed with proton-transfer-reaction mass spectrometry with and without the use of a mobile smoke evacuation system consisting of a smoke evacuator machine, a suction hose and a handpiece. The inlet of the mass spectrometer was positioned 40 cm above the specimen. Various devices were compared: a hard plastic funnel, a flexible foam funnel, an on-tip integrated aspirator of an electrosurgical knife and a standard secretion suction (Yankauer). Also, sound levels were measured at a distance of 40 cm from the handpieces’ inlet.RESULTSThe smoke capture efficiency of the secretion suction was only 53%, while foam funnel, plastic funnel and integrated aspirator were all significantly more effective with a clearance of 95%, 91% and 91%, respectively. The mean sound levels were 68 and 59 A-weighted decibels with the plastic and foam funnel, respectively, 66 A-weighted decibels with the integrated aspirator and 63 A-weighted decibels with the secretion suction.CONCLUSIONSCarcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic volatile organic compounds in surgical smoke can be efficiently reduced by mobile smoke evacuation system, providing improved protection for medical personnel. Devices specifically designed for smoke evacuation are more efficient than standard suction tools. Noise exposure for the surgeon was lowest with the flexible foam funnel and higher with the other handpieces tested.

Optimizing Parameters for Smoke Evacuation.

Current literature lacks recommendations regarding the ideal organization of the smoke evacuation system to minimize inhalation of surgical smoke. This study determines optimal parameters of the smoke evacuation system with respect to the surgical field. This study was conducted in an outpatient surgical facility at a tertiary care center. After 30 seconds of continuous electrocautery of tissue, particulate measurements were recorded using the TSI DustTrak Aerosol Monitor 8520 (>2.5 μm particles) and the TSI P-Trak Ultrafine Particle Counter 8525 (<1 μm particles) while changing the angle and distance of the smoke evacuation system. Particulate matter measurements were lower when suction angle was at 45° than at 90°. For both small-sized and large-sized particles, the lowest particulate matter was recorded when the evacuator was maintained at a 45° angle, 2 to 4 inches away from the cauterizing procedure. Particulate matters dramatically increased after increasing the distance of the smoke evacuator beyond 8 inches from the procedural site. In an effort to reduce smoke inhalation, the authors recommend that smoke evacuation should be placed at a 45° suction angle, no further than 8 inches away from the surgical site, while preserving the surgeon's field of vision.

An effective smoke evacuation system for preventing aerosolization during laparoscopy in the Covid-19 Era

Introduction: The coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic has led the surgical society to new challenges in the operating theatre. Aerosolization during laparoscopic interventions in Covid-19 patients may pose an increased risk to surgical staff and patients. Methods: We briefly review the inconceivably fast emerging studies for laparoscopy during the Covid-19 era and announce our practical method of surgical plume filtration during laparoscopic procedures of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive patients. Results: The use of minimally invasive surgery can be considered appropriate, safe and feasible in patients with Covid-19 and the use of trocar filtration systems reduces considerably the risks of infection. Conclusions: Despite the little evidence of viral transmission through laparoscopic surgical approach, modifications in surgical practice are recommended, such as the use of filtrating systems in order to minimize staff exposure to aerosolized viral particles. Copyright © Celsius Publishing House.

Technique of pressurized intrathoracic aerosol chemotherapy (PITAC) for malignant pleural effusion.

ObjectivesMalignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a devastating evolution of several malignancies. Pressurized intrathoracic aerosol chemotherapy (PITAC) might be a novel therapy option in MPE.MethodsPITAC is considered for patients with MPE with a performance status <2 and without other metastatic sites. General anesthesia is administered and a double-lumen bronchial tube is inserted. The patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position, and the operation is performed after ipsilateral lung exclusion. Two 12-mm balloon trocars are inserted—one in the seventh intercostal space in the mid-axillary line and one in the fifth intercostal space in the anterior axillary line. Extent of pleural disease and volume of MPE are documented. MPE is removed and parietal pleural biopsy are performed. An intrathoracic pressure of 12 mmHg CO2 is established, and a combination of Cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2 in a total volume of 150 cc NaCl 0.9%) and Doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2 in a total volume of 50 cc NaCl 0.9%) are aerosolized via nebulizer in the pleural cavity. Vital signs and nebulization are remote-controlled. After 30 min, the remaining toxic aerosol is exhausted using a closed surgical smoke evacuation system. A 24Fr chest tube is inserted in postero-apical position with continuous negative pressure of 20 cm H2O. When needed, PITAC may be repeated every six weeks in alternate with systemic chemotherapy.ResultsIn our hands, the technique above has shown to be feasible and safe.ConclusionsFurther studies are needed to assess the potential symptomatic and oncological benefits of PITAC in MPE.

Minimal Access Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery during the COVID-19 Era

COVID-19, the novel coronavirus, has affected all aspects of life including the way we do surgery. While patients are being tested with real-time reverse trancriptase-polymerase chain reaction before admission for elective surgeries, there are a good number of false-negative tests. This has led to the concept of a minimum standard precautions in all the negative cases too. In our unit at Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi, we have done 84 minimally access laparoscopic and robotic surgeries during the lockdown. This included benign and malignant diseases. No staff in the operation theater (OT) was infected during any of these surgeries. Wearing personal protective equipment and use of smoke evacuation system in a pressure-adjusted OT is the key to safety.

Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery During COVID-19 Pandemic: Single-Center Experience.

Background: COVID-19 era has put laparoscopic surgery a risk procedure because of theoretical risk of viral transmission of COVID-19. However, safe evacuation of stagnant air during laparoscopic surgery is also necessary to safeguard health care warriors. Methods: We are reporting experience of 24 laparoscopic surgeries using a closed smoke evacuation/filtration system using a ultra low-particulate air (ULPA) filtration capability (ConMed AirSeal® System) at a single center between March 22, 2020, and May 30, 2020. All surgeries were either urgent or emergency in nature. Results: Totally, 17 males and 7 females who required urgent surgery. Most common indication for laparoscopic intervention was acute cholecystitis and complications related to acute cholecystitis. Owing to the closed smoke evacuation system, low intra-abdominal pressure was maintained during all surgeries. Of all procedures, only 0.8 time per procedure, the laparoscope taken out for cleaning. Mean time for completion of surgery was 58 minutes. Compliance of surgical staff was high due to the deemed safe smoke evacuation system. Mean of postoperative pain score was low. Mean hospital stay was 4.9 days. Conclusions: We propose to use a closed smoke evacuation/filtration system with ULPA filtration capability or similar devices in each minimally invasive surgery to reduce risks of transmission as minute as possible until we have enough knowledge about the pattern of disease transmission.

Mitigation of Aerosols Generated During Rhinologic Surgery: A Pandemic-Era Cadaveric Simulation.

ObjectiveAfter significant restrictions initially due to the COVID-19 pandemic, otolaryngologists have begun resuming normal clinical practice. However, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to health care workers through aerosolization and airborne transmission during rhinologic surgery remains incompletely characterized. The objective of this study was to quantify the number concentrations of aerosols generated during rhinologic surgery with and without interventions involving 3 passive suction devices.Study DesignCadaver simulation.SettingDedicated surgical laboratory.Subjects and MethodsIn a simulation of rhinologic procedures with and without different passive suction interventions, the concentrations of generated aerosols in the particle size range of 0.30 to 10.0 µm were quantified with an optical particle sizer.ResultsFunctional endoscopic sinus surgery with and without microdebrider, high-speed powered drilling, use of an ultrasonic aspirator, and electrocautery all produced statistically significant increases in concentrations of aerosols of various sizes (P < .05). Powered drilling, ultrasonic aspirator, and electrocautery generated the highest concentration of aerosols, predominantly submicroparticles <1 µm. All interventions with a suction device were effective in reducing aerosols, though the surgical smoke evacuation system was the most effective passive suction method in 2 of the 5 surgical conditions with statistical significance (P < .05).ConclusionSignificant aerosol concentrations were produced in the range of 0.30 to 10.0 µm during all rhinologic procedures in this cadaver simulation. Rhinologic surgery with a passive suction device results in significant mitigation of generated aerosols.

A novel way to deal with challenge and fear of smoke and gas evacuation during minimal invasive surgery in the current era of COVID-19 pandemic: an ingenuity with review of literature

Presently COVID-19 viral transmission is a major concern among surgeons worldwide with the use of minimally invasive surgery due to creation of pneumoperitoneum. Due to this proposed concern, we sought to review the scientific data, evaluate the use of MIS and introduction of a novel concept to deal with surgical smoke and gas to prevent the risk of COVID-19 viral transmission. A review of literature of viral transmission in surgery, especially emphasizing the transmission of the COVID-19 was done. We also reviewed other surgical society guidelines and recommendations regarding surgery during this pandemic. Few studies have been performed on viral transmission during surgery, but to date there is not enough evidence to support use of MIS over open surgery or vice versa. There are societal guidelines and expert consensus on the modification of standard practices to minimize the risk of viral transmission. With every day rise in COVID-19 patients therefore consequent increase in surgeries in suspected or confirmed cases and exposure of operative staff to aerosolized particles during MIS, use of surgical smoke and gas evacuation system becomes essential. Although different available filters, insufflation systems are part of the surgical procedures but their cost and availability may concern a COVID-19 fighting or a developing nation. We introduced a novel, simple, easily available and cost effective technique to prevent and reduce the risk of viral transmission in the current era of COVID-19 pandemic.

Prospective randomized study evaluating the usefulness of a surgical smoke evacuation system in operating rooms for breast surgery

BackgroundNo prospective evaluation of surgical smoke evacuation systems has yet been conducted anywhere in the world. A prospective randomized study was conducted to clarify the usefulness of a surgical smoke evacuation system in terms of reducing the quantity of environmental pollutants found in operating room air and reducing the occupational exposure of doctors and nurses involved in surgical procedures to surgical smoke, volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde, etc.MethodsOperating room environment conditions with and without the use of a surgical smoke evacuation system were measured, and the personal exposure levels of doctors and nurses involved in surgical procedures were also surveyed. Use of the evacuation system was determined randomly, and the procedures involved were breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy, which were treated as stratification factors.ResultsThe average total volatile organic compound concentration in the operating room was significantly lower when the evacuation system was used compared with when it was not used. The findings were similar for formaldehyde concentration. Multiple regression analysis for healthcare professionals’ personal exposure levels showed that the evacuation system was a factor that significantly impacted their formaldehyde and acetaldehyde personal exposure levels, which were greatly reduced by the use of the system.ConclusionThis study’s findings demonstrate the effectiveness of the evacuation systems, which should increase awareness that their benefits take priority over the drawbacks.Trial registrationThe study was conducted after explaining to participants that it was a study of operating room environments in which their participation was voluntary and obtaining their consent. The study was also approved by the Tokai University Hospital clinical research review committee (no. 5R-022) and registered with the UMIN registry (UMIN000029092) on 13, September, 2017- retrospectively registered.

Surgical Infection Society Guidance for Operative and Peri-Operative Care of Adult Patients Infected by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-associated viral infection (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19) is a virulent, contagious viral pandemic that is affecting populations worldwide. As with any airborne viral respiratory infection, surgical and non-surgical patients may be affected. Methods: Review and synthesis of pertinent English-language literature pertaining to COVID-19 infection among adult patients. Results: COVID-19 disease that requires hospitalization results in critical illness approximately 25% of the time and requires mechanical ventilation with positive airway pressure. Acute kidney injury, a marked hypercoagulable state, and sometimes myocarditis can be features of COVID-19 in addition to the characteristic severe acute lung injury. Even if not among the most seriously afflicted, older patients with medical comorbidities are both predisposed to infection and risk increased morbidity and mortality, however, all persons presenting for surgical intervention should be suspected of infection (and thus transmissibility) even if asymptomatic. Although most elective surgery has been curtailed by administrative or governmental fiat, patients will still need urgent or emergency operative intervention for time-sensitive disease processes such as malignant neoplasia or for true emergencies such as perforated viscus or traumatic injury. It is possible to provide safe surgical care for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and minimize nosocomial transmission to healthcare workers. Conclusions: This guidance will facilitate appropriate protection of patients and staff, and maintenance of infection control measures to assist surgical personnel and facilities to prepare for COVID-19-infected adult patients requiring urgent or emergent operative intervention and to provide optimal patient care.

Expert consensus from the Italian Society for Colposcopy and Cervico-Vaginal Pathology (SICPCV) for colposcopy and outpatient surgery of the lower genital tract during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic, patients need to be evaluated within 2–4 weeks in the following cases: cytology result of “squamous cell carcinoma,” “atypical glandular cells, favor neoplastic,” “endocervical adenocarcinoma in situ,” or “adenocarcinoma”; histopathological diagnosis of suspected invasion from cervical/vaginal biopsy, or invasive disease after a cervical excision procedure, vaginal excision, or vulvar biopsy/excision; sudden onset of strongly suggestive symptoms for malignancy. Digital imaging technologies represent an important opportunity during the COVID‐19 pandemic to share colposcopic images with reference centers, with the aim of avoiding any concentration of patients. All patients must undergo screening for COVID‐19 exposure and should wear a surgical mask. A high‐efficiency filter smoke evacuation system is mandatory to remove surgical smoke. Electrosurgical instruments should be set at the lowest possible power and not be used for long continuous periods to reduce the amount of surgical smoke. The following personal protective equipment should be used: sterile fluid‐repellant surgical gloves, an underlying pair of gloves, eye protection, FFP3 mask, surgical cap, and gown. The colposcope should be protected by a disposable transparent cover. A protective lens that must be disinfected after each use should be applied. The use of a video colposcope should be preferred.