Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34473910›Full record

SynthesisClinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery2021

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.

Stephen P Williams, Samuel C Leong

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. COVID-19 and rhinological surgery.Operative techniques in otolaryngology--head and neck surgery · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Stephen P WilliamsLiverpool Head and Neck Centre, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6694-5064
Samuel C LeongLiverpool Head and Neck Centre, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7213-0387

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesAs we pass the anniversary of the declaration of a global pandemic by the World Health Organisation, it invites us to reflect upon the inescapable changes that coronavirus has wrought upon ENT and, in particular, rhinological practice. As it remains unclear when we will emerge from the shadow of COVID-19, a critical analysis of the evidence base on both the assessment and mitigation of risk is vital for ENT departments worldwide. This article presents a systematic review of the literature examining articles which consider either the quantification of risk or strategies to mitigate risk specifically in the setting of rhinological surgery.

designSystematic literature review.

resultsThe literature search yielded a total of 3406 returns with 24 articles meeting eligibility criteria. A narrative synthesis stratified results into two broad themes: (1) those which made an assessment as to the aerosolisation of droplets during sinus surgery, further sub-divided into work which considered macroscopically visible droplets and that which considered smaller particles; (2) and those studies which examined the mitigation of this risk.

conclusionStudies considering the aerosolisation of both droplets and smaller particles suggest endonasal surgery carries significant risk. While results both highlight a range of innovative adjunctive strategies and support suction as an important intervention to reduce aerosolisation, appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) should be considered mandatory for all healthcare professionals involved in rhinological surgery. Studies have demonstrated that close adherence to PPE use is effective in preventing COVID-19 infection.

Indexed as

AerosolsOperating RoomsCOVID-19HumansInfection ControlNose DiseasesPandemicsParticle SizePersonal Protective EquipmentSARS-CoV-2Aerosolsanterior skull baseCOVID-19endoscopic sinus surgeryrhinologysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34473910
PMCPMC8653184
OpenAlexW3162910836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.