Dutch Oncology COVID-19 consortium:Outcome of COVID-19 in patients with cancer in a nationwide cohort study

Aim of the study: Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods: This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients' characteristics, cancer diagnosis and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results: Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p < 0.001), male gender (p = 0.035), prior or other malignancy (p = 0.045) and active diagnosis of haematological malignancy (p = 0.046) or lung cancer (p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for a fatal outcome of COVID-19. In a subgroup analysis of patients with active malignancy, the risk for a fatal outcome was mainly determined by tumour type (haematological malignancy or lung cancer) and age (≥65 years). Conclusion: The findings in this registry indicate that patients with a haematological malignancy or lung cancer have an increased risk of a worse outcome of COVID-19. During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, these vulnerable patients should avoid exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, whereas treatment adjustments and prioritising vaccination, when available, should also be considered

Topical Anaesthesia Using a Soft Mist Spray Device Allows Comfortable Awake Visualisation of the Airway via Self-Videolaryngoscopy in Volunteers

Background: During endotracheal intubation, there is a 10% incidence of difficult laryngoscopy, which may result in serious complications. It is important to obtain as much information about the visibility of laryngeal structures before the patient is anaesthetised. Performing awake (video-) laryngoscopy on a patient is uncomfortable and can trigger gagging and coughing reflexes, making visualisation nearly impossible. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a soft mist spray device for airway anaesthesia during awake (video-) laryngoscopy. Methods: Twenty healthy volunteers inhaled through the Trachospray device, which was placed in their mouths. Two 2 mL syringes containing lidocaine at 4% were sprayed into the airway during inspiration. After several minutes, the subjects were asked to perform a videolaryngoscopy on themselves until the glottic structures and the vocal cords were visible. Upon completion of the procedure, all participants were asked to fill out a feedback form. Results: The duration of the videolaryngoscopy to visualisation of the vocal cords averaged 17 &plusmn; 13 s. After analysing the data, three distinct groups emerged as follows: Group 1 (70% of participants) showed no response, allowing for easy insertion of the videolaryngoscope. Group 2 (25% of participants) exhibited a light response but still permitted easy insertion and visualisation. One patient demonstrated a clear response with noticeable laryngeal contraction, requiring slightly more effort and discomfort for insertion. In 80% of the participants, the laryngeal structures were visualised according to Cormack&ndash;Lehane grade 1. All participants reported a high level of comfort, with an average rating of NRS 8. The anaesthesiologist assessed the level of anaesthesia as good to very good. No adverse events were observed. Conclusions: The Trachospray provided good, reliable, comfortable, and safe topical anaesthesia for awake videolaryngoscopy. This enables a direct visual assessment of the airway and may assist in making decisions regarding airway management for tracheal intubation

Proper training and use of ultrasonography facilitates lumbar puncture

Abstract With great interest, we read the study of Line Dussourd et al. concluding that ultrasonography allows better identification of anatomical structures before performing a lumbar puncture. We cannot concur with the conclusions of the study because the authors did not visualize the conus medullaris directly, nor did they assess the individual intervertebral levels. In our commentary, we make some suggestions for improvement using ultrasound to locate the optimal site for a lumbar puncture. We do agree that neuraxial ultrasound is of great benefit for the performance of lumbar punctures. Proper training and applying the correct technique, however, is necessary for obtaining all benefits ultrasonography offers