German bronchoscopy unit readiness for the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide survey

Experience with flexible bronchoscopy for noncoronavirus disease of 2019 indications in pediatric patients during the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Flexible bronchoscopy (FB) poses a risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission due to aerosol generation. This study aimed to assess the utilization, indications, outcomes, and safety of FB in pediatric patients for noncoronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) reasons during the pandemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed pediatric patients who underwent FB for non-COVID-19 indications at a tertiary children's hospital's pulmonary clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients showed no COVID-19 symptoms and tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) of nasopharyngeal and throat swabs within 24 h before the procedure. FBs were conducted in the operating room, with healthcare professionals (HCPs) wearing personal protective equipment, including medical N95 masks, gloves, gowns, and eye protection.

RESULTS

Between March 2020 and April 2022, 167 pediatric patients underwent FB for non-COVID-19 indications. Common indications included foreign body aspiration (22.7%), stridor (10.1%), and atelectasis (8.9%). No COVID-19 symptoms were observed in patients on the 1st and 10th days post-FB. During the 1-month follow-up, 52 patients underwent SARSCoV-2 PCR testing, and one patient tested positive in the third week after the procedure. None of the HCPs in the FB team experienced COVID-19 symptoms or tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSION

A bronchoscopy protocol with safety precautions minimized the risk of COVID-19 transmission, allowing safe FB performance for non-COVID-19 indications in pediatric patients during the pandemic. The experience gained in FB during COVID-19 is valuable for similar situations in the future.

Medical education during the Covid-19 pandemic long-term experiences of German clinical medical students

INTRODUCTION

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the accompanying hygiene regulations, medical students in Germany faced multiple educational and personal challenges. The challenges included the cancellation and digitalisation of courses, the closing of university institutions such as libraries, a decrease in social contacts, and the risk of a Covid-19 infection. The aim of this study was to understand medical students' pandemic experiences as well as the consequences of these experiences for the students' future work as physicians.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed 15 guided, one-on-one interviews with clinical medical students (third to fifth year) at the Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and anonymised. We performed a qualitative content analysis in accordance with Mayring and thereby formed an inductive category system. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) were applied.

RESULTS

Five categories were inductively formed: "Changes in the teaching experience", "negative effects on the learning experience", "decrease in personal social contacts", "contact with covid-19", and "pandemic-associated stress increase". The participating students reported higher levels of stress due to isolation and uncertainty regarding their educational future. Furthermore, students welcomed the digitalisation of lectures, developed individual coping strategies, and voluntarily took part in the care of Covid-19 patients. Limitations to social interactions were perceived as the major restrictive factor to their educational structure, their perceived learning success and personal development.

CONCLUSION

This study identified social restrictions as well as didactic and academic structural challenges as relevant factors contributing to perceived stress and fear for medical students during the Covid-19 pandemic, especially as regards their learning experience. Students' acceptance of digitalised learning may enable regular interaction with university peers and may facilitate a structured educational life. However, the implementation of digital resources could not provide a sufficient substitute for in-person courses.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Diagnosis of Lung Cancer

Non-COVID hospital admissions decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and follow-up of people in the lung cancer risk group was delayed. There are not enough studies on the effects of the pandemic period on the diagnosis of lung cancer. In this study, it was aimed to determine the characteristics of patients diagnosed with lung cancer in the pre-pandemic and pandemic period and to investigate the effects of the pandemic on the diagnosis of lung cancer. Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer 16 months before and after the detection of the first COVID-19 case were retrospectively analyzed for their characteristics at the time of diagnosis. Age, gender, pathological diagnosis, distant organ metastasis status, and also pathological stages at the time of diagnosis of the patients were analyzed. Two hundred forty-six patients were included in the study. One hundred forty-five of the patients were diagnosed in the pre-pandemic period and 101 during the pandemic period. Mean age of patients was 64.24 years and 91.87% were male. Pathological diagnosis distributions were similar in the pre-pandemic group and the pandemic period group. Distant organ metastases were present in 59.31% of the pre-pandemic group and 65.35% of the pandemic group. There was no significant difference in terms of the stages of the patients at the time of diagnosis. Number of patients diagnosed with lung cancer during the pandemic period was lower. The characteristics of the patients were similar. These results may have resulted from the decrease in applications to health institutions due to social isolation and fear of COVID-19 infection, and limitations in accessing health services.

Pre- and post-COVID practice of interventional pulmonology in adults in Portugal

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

There is a lack of information regarding bronchoscopy practice in adults in Portugal. Our objective was to obtain an overview of the characteristics, resources, techniques and behaviors in national interventional pulmonology (IP) units, before and after SARS-CoV-2 outbreak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was developed by an expert panel with a total of 46 questions comprising the specifications of each unit, namely physical space, equipment, staff, procedure planning, monitoring, technical differentiation, and numbers pre- and post-COVID-19. Forty-one interventional pulmonology centers were invited to participate between April and May 2021.

RESULTS

37 units (90.2%) responded to the survey. The majority (64.9%) have a fully dedicated space with a weekly presence of ≥3 chest physicians (82.1%) and support of an anesthesiologist on specific days (48.6%). There is marked heterogeneity in the IP unit's equipment, and 56.8% acquired disposable bronchoscopes after COVID-19 pandemics. Pre-bronchoscopy hemogram, platelet count and coagulation tests are regularly asked by more than 90% of the units, even when deep sedation or biopsies are not planned. In 97.3% of cases, topical anesthesia and midazolam are utilized. Propofol (21.6%) and fentanyl (29.7%) are occasionally employed in some institutions. Most units use ancillary sampling techniques to diagnose central or peripheral lesions, with radial EBUS being used for guidance of distal procedures in 37.8% of centers, linear EBUS and EUS-B-FNA for mediastinal diagnosis and/or staging in 45.9% and 27.0% of units, respectively. Cryobiopsies are used by 21.6% of respondents to diagnose diffuse lung diseases. Rigid bronchoscopy is performed in 37.8% of centers. There was a decrease in the number of flexible (p < 0.001) and rigid (p = 0.005) bronchoscopies and an upscale of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 outbreak.

CONCLUSIONS

IP units have variable bronchoscopic practices, but during the COVID-19 pandemic, they complied with most international recommendations, as elective procedures were postponed and PPE levels increased.

Inequalities in the decline and recovery of pathological cancer diagnoses during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The restructuring of healthcare systems to cope with the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a reduction in clinical services such as cancer screening and diagnostics.

METHODS

Data from the four Northern Ireland pathology laboratories were used to assess trends in pathological cancer diagnoses from 1st March to 12th September 2020 overall and by cancer site, sex and age. These trends were compared to the same timeframe from 2017 to 2019.

RESULTS

Between 1st March and 12th September 2020, there was a 23% reduction in cancer diagnoses compared to the same time period in the preceding 3 years. Although some recovery occurred in August and September 2020, this revealed inequalities across certain patient groups. Pathological diagnoses of lung, prostate and gynaecological malignancies remained well below pre-pandemic levels. Males and younger/middle-aged adults, particularly the 50-59-year-old patient group, also lagged behind other population demographic groups in terms of returning to expected numbers of pathological cancer diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical need to protect cancer diagnostic services in the ongoing pandemic to facilitate timely investigation of potential cancer cases. Targeted public health campaigns may be needed to reduce emerging inequalities in cancer diagnoses as the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

Bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic: effect on current practices and strategies to reduce procedure-associated transmission

Introduction: Bronchoscopy and related procedures have unambiguously been affected during the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Corona Virus-2 (SARS COV-2). Ordinary bronchoscopy practices and lung cancer services might have changed over this pandemic and for the years to come.Areas covered: This manuscript summarizes the utility of bronchoscopy in COVID-19 patients, and the impact of the pandemic in lung cancer diagnostic services, in view of possible viral spread during these We conducted a literature review of articles published in PubMed/Medline from inception to November 5th, 2020 using relevant terms.Expert opinion: Without doubt this pandemic has changed the way bronchoscopy and related procedures are being performed. Mandatory universal personal protective equipment, pre-bronchoscopy PCR tests, dedicated protective barriers and disposable bronchoscopes might be the safest and simpler way to perform even the most complicated procedures.