key: cord-0857721-67tts3oj
authors: Ozturk, Ayperi; Sener, Melahat U.; Yılmaz, Aydın
title: Bronchoscopic procedures during COVID‐19 pandemic: Experiences in Turkey
date: 2020-08-11
journal: J Surg Oncol
DOI: 10.1002/jso.26164
sha: 0aa9b35d67cc892c4b1597bf1e293999400e47d1
doc_id: 857721
cord_uid: 67tts3oj

BACKGROUND: Globally, coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) is a new, highly contagious, and life‐threatening virus. We aimed to demonstrate how we proceeded with bronchoscopic procedures without published guidelines at the inception of the pandemic period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All bronchoscopic procedures applied from the first case seen in Turkey (11 March‐15 May) were evaluated retrospectively. Patient data on indications, diagnosis, types of procedures, and the results of COVID‐19 tests were recorded. RESULTS: This study included 126 patients; 36 required interventional bronchoscopic techniques (28.6%), 74 required endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS; 58.7%), and 16 required flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (12.7%). All interventional rigid bronchoscopic techniques were performed for emergent indications: malignant airway obstruction (66.7%), tracheal stenosis (25%), and bronchopleural fistula (8.3%). Malignancy was diagnosed in 59 (79.7%), 12 (50%), and 4 (25%) patients who underwent EBUS, interventional procedures, and fibreoptic bronchoscopy, respectively. All personnel wore personal protective equipment and patients wore a surgical mask, cap, and disposable gown. Of the patients, 31 (24.6%) were tested for COVID‐19 and all the results were negative. COVID‐19 was not detected in any of the patients after a 14‐day follow‐up period. CONCLUSION: This study was based on our experiences and demonstrated that EBUS and/or bronchoscopy should not be postponed in patients with known or suspected lung cancer.

million cases (as of May 18) of infection in nearly 200 countries worldwide. 1 The route of transmission is not yet exactly understood; it is thought to be mainly transmitted through respiratory droplets or by direct contact. However, COVID-19 has also been detected in nonrespiratory specimens, such as stool, blood, ocular secretions, and semen, but the role of these sites in the transmission is uncertain. [4] [5] [6] As of 18 May, as in many countries, the number of daily new diagnosed cases in Turkey is still over 1000. 1 This is due to the ability of the COVID-19 virus to spread rapidly from human to human through direct contact or respiratory droplets. Especially within 2 m of an infected person, the transmission risk is even higher. 7 Although bronchoscopy is a procedure used for the diagnosis and treatment of various conditions, it is also known as an aerosolgenerating procedure, so it results in a high risk of infection for health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. 8 On the other hand, throughout the pandemic, patients continued to be admitted with symptoms not related to COVID-19 infection, but as a result of suspected lung cancer instead. In these patients, bronchoscopy or endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS) played an important role in both diagnosis and treatment. In this study, we reviewed the bronchoscopic procedures performed during the pandemic in an interventional pulmonology unit in Turkey and stated how we proceeded with these bronchoscopic procedures and precautions without any published guidelines on this subject. Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) with a dedicated scanner (EU-ME1; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) was used to examine the lymph nodes of patients. All procedures were done by a minimum possible number of health care workers, such as one or two bronchoscopists, one member of the medical staff, an anesthesiologist, and a technician. All physicians and ancillary staff were tested for COVID-19 during hospital health screening and no positivity was detected. Only one ancillary staff was tested again after traveled to another city and resulted as negative but he was also isolated for 14 days then continued to work again together with us.

performed are shown in Figure 1 . Accordingly, 66.7% (n = 24) of patients that underwent interventional procedures had a malignant central airway obstruction and, of these patients, 50% (n = 12) had no diagnosis (Figure 2A -F). While APC-assisted MTR was the most frequently used technique (n = 12), CR in addition to APC-assisted MTR was also used (n = 7). Dilatation with CR (n = 2) and MTR only (n = 2) were the other techniques used. All patients were presented with a diagnosis (Table 1 ) and treatments were started as soon as possible.

A silicone Y-stent was removed in one patient due to mucostasis, which caused severe dyspnea. Nine patients with postintubation tracheal stenosis presented with severe stridor. All patients were treated by tracheal dilatation and cryotherapy to the stenosis line.

Two patients underwent rigid bronchoscopy three times due to Table 1 . EBUS-TBNA was mostly performed to diagnose suspected malignancy (n = 36; 49%); however, it was also used for simultaneous diagnosis and staging in 20 patients (27%) and staging in a further 16 patients (22%; Figure 1 ). In 61% (34/56) of patients who received EBUS-TBNA, the result was a diagnosis of lung cancer.

As a result, of the patients who underwent EBUS, 59 (79.7%) were diagnosed with malignancy and quickly began treatment (Table 1) .

Before the procedures, 11 patients (15%) were tested for COVID-19, and all results were negative. another patient with COVID-19. 9 About 2 weeks following the first identified COVID-19 case, the possible case definition was changed, and all those with a cough or shortness of breath and a fever were tested for COVID-19. 10 Second, an announcement that no patients with COVID-19 should be directed to appointed nonpandemic hospitals was declared. Thus, the minimization of transmission from patients with COVID-19 to other patients or health care workers was ensured. Third, health care workers were allowed to rest by applying for rotation. Lastly, guidelines were constantly updated by a scientific committee by closely following the global developments of the pandemic.

COVID-19 is known to be transmitted through respiratory droplets and direct contact; the risk of transmission is higher within ∼2 m from an infected person; however, the maximum distance is still undetermined. 11 Bronchoscopy is an aerosol-generating procedure that leads to the pronounced formation of aerosols and thus poses a high risk of infection to proximate health care staff. 8 In addition, nosocomial outbreaks and pseudo-outbreaks caused by various bacteria or viruses linked to inadequately processed bronchoscopes have been reported in several studies. 7, 12 The present study site is a training and research hospital for respiratory diseases and thoracic surgery specifically in Ankara, Turkey, and was, therefore, classified as a nonpandemic hospital. Therefore, during the pandemic, patients with symptoms and signs of suspected lung cancer were referred from all over the country and admitted to our clinic for further examination and treatment. At the onset of the pandemic, there were no national or international guidelines determined for bronchoscopic procedures, which presented a significant problem. Although the COVID-19 Science Committee Guideline was updated on 14 April, there was still no clear recommendation regarding bronchoscopic procedures, 13 so the precautions applied before, during, and after this point in relation to bronchoscopic procedures were determined together with hospital administration and an infection committee.

We assigned the precise bronchoscopy indications for both outpatients and the intensive care unit patients and implemented the applications outlined below within the framework of protection measures determined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States. 14 

All procedures were performed in an independent bronchoscopy unit with separate ventilation and high-efficiency particulate air filters, close to intensive care; we did not have a negative pressure room.

Staff were reduced to a minimum throughout the day by creating a core team including a bronchoscopist, bronchoscopy assistants, nurses, and an anesthetist who carried out all the daily interventions.

Preprocedure, in the bronchoscopy unit and resting area, a surgical mask was worn by all patients. All personnel in the operating room were dressed in personal protective equipment (PPE), including an N95 mask, eye protection (reusable safety glasses), disposable gloves, an impervious gown, a face shield, and a cap. All procedures were implemented under deep sedation or general anesthesia. For flexible bronchoscopy, a transnasal approach was preferred. For rigid bronchoscopy, conventional closed-circuit ventilation, and reduction of the aerosol leakage were preferred; jet ventilation was avoided.

Patients who underwent EBUS-TBNA and FOB were discharged on the same day and were suggested to follow-up if they experienced symptoms such as fever, dyspnea, and cough for 14 days postprocedure. When the patients returned to the clinic after 10 days to receive their results, they were asked to disclose any of the aforementioned symptoms. Standard disinfection protocols were followed for the cleaning of bronchoscopes and video monitors, and at least 30 minutes were given for disinfection and ventilation between procedures.

In line with these precautions taken during the first 2 months of the pandemic period, a total of 36 interventional procedures, 74 EBUS-TBNA, and 16 FOB were performed. Even though Ost DE recommends testing all patients before the procedure, we only tested 31 of 126 (24.6%) patients. 15 Although this was due to the difficulty of accessing tests during the initial pandemic, we decided it was more appropriate to test patients with a higher likelihood of infection based on symptoms, since the false negativity of the test was about 67% in the following days. 16 The first American Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology statement was published in late March; in the following days, expert opinions on the use of bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic were published one after another. [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] While the use of PPE and bronchoscopy indications were similar between the published reports and our practice, not using negative pressure rooms, not testing all patients, using a reusable bronchoscope and only giving a 30-minute interval between the procedures are the notable differences between the reports and our practice. We proved that these differences did not cause any problems in the detection of COVID-19 in either patients and health care workers after the procedure.

Although it has been reported that a brief delay (2-3 weeks) will not harm cancer diagnosis and staging, 22 how long the COVID-19 pandemic will continue is still unknown. Bronchoscopy is often required both for diagnosis and staging, and timeliness of bronchoscopic diagnosis impacts every stage of lung cancer care. Also, EBUS for staging and diagnosis as the first test in patients with T1-3, N1-3, and M0 disease has been shown to decreases complications, the number of tests required and time to treatment. 23 Moreover, delays in care may lead to missed opportunities in terms of cure or palliation for lung cancer. So, whether it is judicious to delay bronchoscopy or EBUS of patients with known or suspected lung cancer in this unknown process is the question at hand. Based on our experience, the answer to this question is no, EBUS and/or bronchoscopy should not be postponed in patients with known or suspected lung cancer; we determined that COVID-19 transmission can be prevented by taken sufficient and necessary precautions.

World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation report-119

A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China

Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). World Health Organization

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens

Clinical characteristics and results of semen tests among men with coronavirus disease 2019

SARS-CoV-2 isolation from ocular secretions of a patient with COVID-19 in Italy with prolonged viral RNA detection

Potential impact of contaminated bronchoscopes on novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients

Aerosolgenerating procedures and risk of transmission of acute respiratory infections: a systematic review. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

The Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health Covid-19 Science Committee Guideline

The Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health Covid-19 Science Committee Guideline

A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern

Bronchoscope-associated clusters of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae

The Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health, General Directorate of Public Health, COVID-19 Guideline (SARS-CoV-2 Infection)

Interim infection prevention and control recommendations for patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in healthcare settings

Bronchoscopy in the age of COVID-19

Variation in false-negative rate of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-based SARS-CoV-2 tests by time since exposure

American Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (AABIP) statement on the use of bronchoscopy and respiratory specimen collection in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection

Performing bronchoscopy in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: practice statement from an international expert panel

The use of bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic: CHEST/AABIP guideline and expert panel report

Summarizing societal guidelines regarding bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic

Safe performance of diagnostic bronchoscopy/EBUS during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Clinical and organizational factors in the initial evaluation of patients with lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer

Quality gaps and comparative effectiveness in lung cancer staging and diagnosis

Bronchoscopic procedures during COVID-19 pandemic: Experiences in Turkey

The authors declare that there are no conflict of interests.

Data available on request from the authors.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0692-4784Melahat U. Sener http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8309-9517Aydın Yılmaz http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6776-2454