Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Pattern of cancer patient referral and organisational model of an interventional pulmonology programme during the COVID-19 pandemic

Rocco Trisolini, Daniele Magnini, Vanina Livi, Fausto Leoncini, Lucia M. Porro, Maria C. Flore, Daniela Paioli, Giovanni Sotgiu
ERJ Open Research 2021 7: 00152-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00152-2021
Rocco Trisolini
1Interventional Pulmonology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rocco Trisolini
  • For correspondence: rocco.trisolini@policlinicogemelli.it
Daniele Magnini
1Interventional Pulmonology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vanina Livi
1Interventional Pulmonology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Fausto Leoncini
1Interventional Pulmonology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lucia M. Porro
2Pulmonology Unit, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria C. Flore
2Pulmonology Unit, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniela Paioli
1Interventional Pulmonology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Giovanni Sotgiu
3Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Statistics Unit, Dept of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Giovanni Sotgiu
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

An interventional pulmonary programme can be carried out safely for both cancer patients and HCWs during the #COVID19 pandemic. However, a worrisome reduction of new cancer patient referral occurs during periods of high community spread of the virus. https://bit.ly/2PRWNXo

To the Editor:

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and its related disease (coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)) have heavily impacted cancer pathways, with population-based modelling studies predicting a substantial increase in the number of avoidable cancer deaths, mainly due to a diagnostic delay [1–3]. While the utility of bronchoscopy for the microbiological confirmation of the SARS-CoV-2 infection has been evaluated, the feasibility and safety of a diagnostic programme aimed at guaranteeing timely invasive procedures to patients with suspected or known thoracic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been thoroughly assessed [4–6]. In a literature review, we found a single important study that described an organisational model for bronchoscopic procedures during the first wave of the pandemic, when no published guidelines were available [7]. However, it could not analyse the referral pattern over time as it covered a short time frame (2 months), included a relatively small number of cancer patients (126), and did not detail how patients and staff were screened for the SARS-CoV-2 infection [7].

The aim of the present study was to describe the pattern of cancer patients’ referral, the organisational model and rate of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 to healthcare workers (HCWs) of an interventional pulmonology unit of a tertiary referral centre.

A new interventional pulmonology unit was established at Policlinico Gemelli (Rome, Italy) on 1 June 2020, at the end of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. To guarantee a fully functional invasive diagnostic and therapeutic programme, we used a complex organisational model that followed the “Plan, Do, Check, Act” approach, and took into account strategies regarding patient and HCW screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, distribution of personal protective equipment (PPE), anaesthesia protocols and the characteristics of the operating theatre (figure 1a). As for the HCWs, we applied a systematic testing regimen including a rapid antigenic test on a nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) every 15 days, as well as a RT-PCR test on a NPS in cases of dubious or positive rapid antigenic test or unforeseen exposure to a COVID-19 patient (figure 1a). A prospective database was used to record the number, type, anaesthesia setting, outcomes and complications of the invasive procedures, as well as the results of the surveillance of the SARS-CoV-2 infection based on NPS in HCWs and patients. The outcomes of the study were: 1) the frequency and type of invasive procedures for oncological patients; and 2) the rate of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in the HCWs and the patients accessing the programme.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

a) Organisational model for access to the interventional diagnostic and therapeutic invasive procedures and their execution during the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with thoracic malignancies. b) Run chart of monthly invasive procedures and c) number of new COVID-19 cases recorded in Rome, Italy, on the first day of each month during the study period. HCW: healthcare worker; PPE: personal protective equipment; US: ultrasound; NPS: nasopharyngeal swab; LMA: laryngeal mask airway; ACH: air changes per hour. #: unforeseen exposure to a COVID-19 patient typically indicates the execution of an invasive procedure on a patient whose SARS-CoV-2 testing was negative in the 48 h before the procedure but became positive in the 7 days after the procedure.

During the study period (1 June 1 2020 to 31 January 2021), 513 invasive procedures were performed in patients with suspected/known malignancies. Most of the procedures (407 out of 513, 79%) were diagnostic/staging advanced bronchoscopy procedures (endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS), endoscopic ultrasound with bronchoscope and guided bronchoscopy) (351 out of 513, 68%) or ultrasound-guided percutaneous needle biopsy (56 out of 513, 11%). The overall number of procedures (279 versus 234), mainly the frequency of procedures carried out to obtain the first diagnosis of malignancy (227 versus 180), was higher in the first 4 months, when the virus transmission rate in the Rome was low, in comparison with the last 4 months, which coincided with the second wave of the pandemic (figure 1b and c). COVID-19-related symptoms or signs or positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular tests were not observed in the HCWs employed during the study. The surveillance protocol helped detect six patients awaiting bronchoscopy who had a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test on NPS despite being asymptomatic; their invasive programme was postponed until molecular test conversion. Among the 146 inpatients who underwent two SARS-CoV-2 molecular tests as per our institution protocol in cases of hospital stays of >3 days (figure 1a), the test results were concordant in 142 (97.3%) and discordant (negative on admission but positive on anticipated discharge) in four (2.7%). Notably, these four patients underwent the invasive testing (rigid bronchoscopy for stent placement in one patient, ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of a supraclavicular lymph node in one patient, guided bronchoscopy in one patient and EBUS-TBNA in one patient) with a mean time of 36 h between the procedure and the positive NPS test result.

Our epidemiological study shows that invasive procedures for cancer patients decreased by 16% during the second wave of the pandemic, although the staff of the unit were not employed in the COVID-19 wards to guarantee healthcare continuity regardless of the SARS-CoV-2 community spread. In an attempt to understand the referral patterns observed during the study, we discussed with many cancer patients the reasons possibly causing a delay in their access to the hospital services during the phases of high community spread of the virus, and identified three important factors. While the fear of acquiring the SARS-CoV-2 infection in the hospitals was most commonly cited, following the advice of the public authorities to remain home unless indispensable and self-isolating themselves for the fear of being infectious in the presence of mild respiratory symptoms were important factors as well. Unfortunately, the reduction (21%) was mainly relevant for patients with suspected malignancies who should have undergone the first diagnostic/staging invasive procedure. This finding is particularly worrisome as the poor prognosis of lung cancer frequently depends on a delayed diagnosis leading to the disease being identified at advanced stages [3]. No differences were detected in the referral of patients with previously diagnosed cancer needing a diagnostic (i.e. bronchoalveolar lavage for suspected infection during the exposure of a systemic therapy) or a therapeutic procedure (i.e., rigid bronchoscopy for stent placement) in the setting of a defined oncological programme.

None of the HCWs developed SARS-CoV-2 infection during the study period. This finding is remarkable, as bronchoscopy is among the invasive procedures considered at the highest risk of airborne transmission [8, 9]. Furthermore, four of the patients who underwent the invasive testing were probably infected during the procedure, as they were found to have a positive RT-PCR NPS within the subsequent 36 h. One of them, in particular, underwent a rigid bronchoscopy, which is by far the endoscopic procedure associated with the highest risk of viral transmission as it provides a direct communication between the patient's airway and the endoscopy suite [8, 9]. Given these results, we infer that the systematic and correct use of the PPE, and the execution of the procedures in an endoscopy suite that was adequately ventilated and carefully disinfected after each procedure, significantly reduced the biological risk [8, 9].

Finally, a screening programme for SARS-CoV-2 infection, which we managed to improve during the study period thanks to the progressive increase in testing capability in Italy, is key for both the HCWs and the patients. However, the sensitivity of the RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 ranges between 70% and 85% in symptomatic patients, and might be lower in asymptomatic individuals based on a low viral load [10, 11]. These diagnostic sensitivity values might partly explain why four inpatients who underwent two RT-PCR tests were found to have discordant test results (negative on admission but positive on anticipated discharge). It is, therefore, crucial that PPE is worn systematically and appropriately during interventional pulmonology activity, even if the pre-procedure molecular screening is negative.

In conclusion, our study suggests that an interventional pulmonary programme can be carried out safely for both the cancer patients and HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic, keeping in mind that a worrisome reduction of new cancer patients’ referral occurs during periods of high community spread of the virus.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: R. Trisolini reports receiving honoraria for lectures from Pentax Medical and serving on advisory boards for AstraZeneca.

  • Conflict of interest: D. Magnini has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: V. Livi has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: F. Leoncini has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: L.M. Porro has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M.C. Flore has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: D. Paioli has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: G. Sotgiu has nothing to disclose.

  • Received March 7, 2021.
  • Accepted April 27, 2021.
  • Copyright ©The authors 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org

References

  1. ↵
    1. United Kingdom Lung Cancer Coalition
    . COVID-19 matters: a review of the impact of COVID-19 on the lung cancer pathway and opportunities for innovation emerging from the health system response to the pandemic. Solihull, United Kingdom Lung Cancer Coalition, 2020.
    1. Maringe C,
    2. Spicer J,
    3. Morris M, et al.
    The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21: 1023–1034. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30388-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Leong TL
    . Delayed access to lung cancer screening and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: are we headed for a lung cancer pandemic? Respirology 2020; 26: 145–146. doi: 10.1111/resp.13996.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Mondoni M,
    2. Sferrazza Papa GF,
    3. Rinaldo R, et al.
    Utility and safety of bronchoscopy during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in Italy: a retrospective, multicentre study. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2002767. doi:10.1183/13993003.02767-2020
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Geri P,
    2. Salton F,
    3. Zuccatosta L, et al.
    Limited role for bronchoalveolar lavage to exclude COVID-19 after negative upper respiratory tract swabs: a multicentre study. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2001733. doi:10.1183/13993003.01733-2020
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Trisolini R,
    2. Bello G,
    3. Antonelli M
    . Finding an evidence-based and clinically important role for bronchoalveolar lavage in the setting of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Chest 2021; 159: 1680–1681. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2020.11.037
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Ozturk A,
    2. Sener MU,
    3. Yilmaz A
    . Bronchoscopy procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Surg Oncol 2020; 122: 1020–1026. doi:10.1002/jso.26164
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Wahidi MM,
    2. Shojaee S,
    3. Lamb CR, et al.
    The use of bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Chest 2020; 158: 1268-1281. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2020.04.036
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Doggett N,
    2. Chow C,
    3. Mubareka S
    . Characterization of experimental and clinical bioaerosol generation during potential aerosol-generating procedures. Chest 2020; 158: 2467–2473. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2020.07.026
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Fang Y,
    2. Zhang H,
    3. Xie J, et al.
    Sensitivity of chest CT for COVID-19: comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology 2020: 296: E115–E117. doi:10.1148/radiol.2020200432
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
    . Infection control guidance for healthcare professionals about Coronavirus (COVID-19). www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/infection-control.html Date last updated: June 3, 2020.
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 7 Issue 2 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 7 (2)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Pattern of cancer patient referral and organisational model of an interventional pulmonology programme during the COVID-19 pandemic
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Pattern of cancer patient referral and organisational model of an interventional pulmonology programme during the COVID-19 pandemic
Rocco Trisolini, Daniele Magnini, Vanina Livi, Fausto Leoncini, Lucia M. Porro, Maria C. Flore, Daniela Paioli, Giovanni Sotgiu
ERJ Open Research Apr 2021, 7 (2) 00152-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00152-2021

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Pattern of cancer patient referral and organisational model of an interventional pulmonology programme during the COVID-19 pandemic
Rocco Trisolini, Daniele Magnini, Vanina Livi, Fausto Leoncini, Lucia M. Porro, Maria C. Flore, Daniela Paioli, Giovanni Sotgiu
ERJ Open Research Apr 2021, 7 (2) 00152-2021; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00152-2021
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Lung cancer
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • rs2070600 SNP regulates AGER splicing and sputum sRAGE
  • Procoagulant microparticles and COVID-19
Show more Original research letters

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society