ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2021
Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in-office procedures.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- One year into the COVID-19 pandemic: What do we know so far from studies assessing risk and mitigation of droplet aerosolisation during endonasal surgery? A systematic review.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Variation in aerosol generation by surgical modality during oropharyngeal and laryngeal surgery.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Article
- Article
- Nasal endoscopy, room filtration, and aerosol concentrations during live outpatient encounters: a prospective, case-control study.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2022Article
- Aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in-office procedures.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCadaveric simulations have shown endonasal drilling and cautery generate aerosols, which is a significant concern for otolaryngologists during the COVID-19 era. This study quantifies aerosol generation during routine rhinologic surgeries and in-office procedures in live patients.
methodsAerosols ranging from 0.30 to 10.0 μm were measured in real-time using an optical particle sizer during surgeries and in-office procedures. Various mask conditions were tested during rigid nasal endoscopy (RNE) and postoperative debridement (POD).
resultsHigher aerosol concentrations (AC) ranging from 2.69 to 10.0 μm were measured during RNE (
conclusionUse of a surgical mask over the patient's mouth during in-office procedures or a mask with a slit for an endoscope during RNE significantly diminished aerosol generation. However, whether this reduction in aerosol generation is sufficient to prevent transmission of communicable diseases via aerosols was beyond the scope of this study. There were several spikes in aerosols during FESS and ASBS, though none were associated with endonasal drilling with the use of suction mitigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.