Negative-Pressure Isolation Mask for Endoscopic Examination During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Aerosol protection using modified N95 respirator during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has affected the worldwide practice of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Here we designed a modified N95 respirator with a channel for endoscope insertion and evaluated its efficacy in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Thirty patients scheduled for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomized into the modified N95 (n=15) or control (n=15) group. The mask was placed on the patient after anesthesia administration and particles were counted every minute before (baseline) and during the procedure by a TSI AeroTrak particle counter (9306-04; TSI Inc.) and categorized by size (0.3, 0.5, 1, 3, 5, and 10 µm). Differences in particle counts between time points were recorded.

RESULTS

During the procedure, the modified N95 group displayed significantly smaller overall particle sizes than the control group (median [interquartile range], 231 [54-385] vs. 579 [213-1,379]×103/m3; p=0.056). However, the intervention group had a significant decrease in 0.3-µm particles (68 [-25-185] vs. 242 [72-588]×103/m3; p=0.045). No adverse events occurred in either group. The device did not cause any inconvenience to the endoscopists or patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This modified N95 respirator reduced the number of particles, especially 0.3-µm particles, generated during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Bronchoscopy masks mitigate aerosols during upper gastrointestinal endoscopies

Background and study aims Upper gastrointestinal endoscopies are considered aerosol-generating procedures (AGP) that risk spread of airborne diseases such as SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to investigate where clinically approved bronchoscopy masks applied to patients during esophagogastroduodenoscopies can mitigate spread of aerosols and droplets. Patients and methods This study included patients undergoing routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in a standard endoscopy room and used a particle counter to measure size and number of particles 10 cm from the mouths of 49 patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopies, of whom 12 wore bronchoscopy masks and 37 did not (controls). Particle counts in the aerosol (≤ 5 µm diameter) and droplet (> 5 µm-diameter) size ranges were measured and averaged over the duration of procedures. Results The use of bronchoscopy masks offers a 47% reduction ( P = 0.01) in particle count for particles < 5 μm in diameter over the procedure duration (aerosols). Conclusions Bronchoscopy masks or similar are a simple, low-cost mitigation technique that can be used during outbreaks of respiratory diseases such as COVID-19 to improve safety and reduce fallow times.

Clinical trial research agenda on COVID-19 - the first two years in Germany and beyond

BACKGROUND

We have followed the COVID-19 clinical trial research agenda from the beginning using the COVID-evidence.org platform. Now, two years after the COVID-19 pandemic started, our aim was to re-examine this research agenda with the latest data to provide a global perspective on the research landscape with a focus on Germany.

METHODS

We reviewed and updated previously published data on the COVID-19 clinical research agenda as of 28February 2022 focusing on randomized trials. We used the COVID-evidence.org platform including registry entries from ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform as well as publications from the Living OVerview of Evidence platform for COVID-19 (L·OVE).

RESULTS

Two years on from the pandemic outbreak, there were 4,673 registered trials. The majority of these trials have remained small with a median of 120 planned participants (IQR 60-320). In the first hundred days of the pandemic most of them (50%) had been registered in China. More than two years later, the five countries with the most registered trials (alone or within a framework of international collaborations) were the USA (825 trials; 18%), Iran (619 trials; 13%), India (566 trials; 12%), China (353 trials; 8%), and Spain (309 trials; 7%). Only 119 trials were reported to have a study site in Germany (2.5% of the registered trials). Of the 4,673 trials registered, 15% (694 trials) had published their results by February 2022. The clinical research agenda has been marked by both successes, such as the large RECOVERY trial providing evidence on 10 treatments for COVID-19 including over 45,000 patients as of February 2022, and failures: worldwide only 57 randomized trials have been registered over two years that aimed to assess non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., face mask policies and lockdown measures) to prevent COVID-19, and only 11 of them had published results informing decisions that have an impact on the life of billions of people worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 clinical research agenda has highlighted the substantial effort of the research community but also the challenges of the clinical research ecosystem. Most importantly, it has shed light on the ability to circumvent traditional barriers and to make trials more useful even under extraordinary conditions. The time to learn our lessons and apply them is now, and the time to demonstrate how we have improved the system is before the next pandemic.