Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury.

BACKGROUND: This is the third update of the original Cochrane Review published in July 2005 and updated previously in 2012 and 2016. Cancer is a significant global health issue. Radiotherapy is a treatment modality for many malignancies, and about 50% of people having radiotherapy will be long-term survivors. Some will experience late radiation tissue injury (LRTI), developing months or years following radiotherapy. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested as a treatment for LRTI based on the ability to improve the blood supply to these tissues. It is postulated that HBOT may result in both healing of tissues and the prevention of complications following surgery and radiotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) for treating or preventing late radiation tissue injury (LRTI) compared to regimens that excluded HBOT. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 24 January 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of HBOT versus no HBOT on LRTI prevention or healing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. survival from time of randomisation to death from any cause; 2. complete or substantial resolution of clinical problem; 3. site-specific outcomes; and 4. ADVERSE EVENTS: Our secondary outcomes were 5. resolution of pain; 6. improvement in quality of life, function, or both; and 7. site-specific outcomes. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen studies contributed to this review (1071 participants) with publications ranging from 1985 to 2022. We added four new studies to this updated review and evidence for the treatment of radiation proctitis, radiation cystitis, and the prevention and treatment of osteoradionecrosis (ORN). HBOT may not prevent death at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 1.83; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 166 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is some evidence that HBOT may result in complete resolution or provide significant improvement of LRTI (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.89; I2 = 64%; 5 RCTs, 468 participants; low-certainty evidence) and HBOT may result in a large reduction in wound dehiscence following head and neck soft tissue surgery (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.94; I2 = 70%; 2 RCTs, 264 participants; low-certainty evidence). In addition, pain scores in ORN improve slightly after HBOT at 12 months (mean difference (MD) -10.72, 95% CI -18.97 to -2.47; I2 = 40%; 2 RCTs, 157 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding adverse events, HBOT results in a higher risk of a reduction in visual acuity (RR 4.03, 95% CI 1.65 to 9.84; 5 RCTs, 438 participants; high-certainty evidence). There was a risk of ear barotrauma in people receiving HBOT when no sham pressurisation was used for the control group (RR 9.08, 95% CI 2.21 to 37.26; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 357 participants; high-certainty evidence), but no such increase when a sham pressurisation was employed (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.52 to 2.21; I2 = 74%; 2 RCTs, 158 participants; high-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: These small studies suggest that for people with LRTI affecting tissues of the head, neck, bladder and rectum, HBOT may be associated with improved outcomes (low- to moderate-certainty evidence). HBOT may also result in a reduced risk of wound dehiscence and a modest reduction in pain following head and neck irradiation. However, HBOT is unlikely to influence the risk of death in the short term. HBOT also carries a risk of adverse events, including an increased risk of a reduction in visual acuity (usually temporary) and of ear barotrauma on compression. Hence, the application of HBOT to selected participants may be justified. The small number of studies and participants, and the methodological and reporting inadequacies of some of the primary studies included in this review demand a cautious interpretation. More information is required on the subset of disease severity and tissue type affected that is most likely to benefit from this therapy, the time for which we can expect any benefits to persist and the most appropriate oxygen dose. Further research is required to establish the optimum participant selection and timing of any therapy. An economic evaluation should also be undertaken.

Dental tourism and the risk of barotrauma and barodontalgia.

Background and aim Dental tourism, which reflects the provision of health care services abroad, also includes a travelling component. Air travel after dental intervention may cause barotrauma and barodontalgia. This paper aimed to provide guiding principles regarding the minimal time interval between dental procedures and air travel to prevent these adverse effects.Methods A literature search was performed to reveal information with regards to complications related to flights following dental treatments. There is little research in this area and most of it has been conducted on the military aircrew population, which has different characteristics of flight and personnel than civilian commercial flights.Results The recommended time of flying is one week after most dental intervention and six weeks after a sinus lift procedure. The minimal time required between a procedure and flight is 24 hours after restorative treatment, 24-48 hours after simple extraction, 72 hours after nonsurgical endodontic procedure, surgical extraction, and implant placement, and at least two weeks after sinus lift procedure.Conclusions The provided guidelines may serve as a starting point for the clinician's decision-making. The tailoring of an individual treatment plan to the patient should take into consideration the patient's condition, dental procedure, complications and flight characteristics. Further research based on commercial flights is needed to formulate more accurate guidelines for the civilian population.

Diagnosis and Management of Barosinusitis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review to investigate the common presenting symptoms of barosinusitis, the incidence of those findings, the methods for diagnosis, as well as the medical and surgical treatment options. METHODS: A review of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for articles published between 1967 and 2020 was conducted with the following search term: aerosinusitis OR "sinus squeeze" OR barosinusitis OR (barotrauma AND sinusitis) OR (barotrauma AND rhinosinusitis). Twenty-seven articles encompassing 232 patients met inclusion criteria and were queried for demographics, etiology, presentation, and medical and surgical treatments. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 33.3 years, where 21.7% were females and 78.3% were males. Causes of barotrauma include diving (57.3%), airplane descent (26.7%), and general anesthesia (0.4%). The most common presentations were frontal pain (44.0%), epistaxis (25.4%), and maxillary pain (10.3%). Most patients received topical steroids (44.0%), oral steroids (28.4%), decongestants (20.7%), and antibiotics (15.5%). For surgical treatment, most patients received functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) (49.6%). Adjunctive surgeries include middle meatal or maxillary antrostomy (20.7%), septoplasty (15.5%), and turbinate surgery (9.1%). The most efficacious medical treatments are as follows: 63.6% success rate with oral steroids (66 treated), 50.0% success rate with topical steroids (102 treated), and 50.0% success rate analgesics (10 treated). For surgical treatments received by greater than 10% of the sample, the most efficacious was FESS (91.5% success rate, 108 treated). CONCLUSION: Oral and topical steroids should be first line therapies. If refractory, then functional endoscopic sinus surgery is an effective treatment.

Unique challenges in naval military dentistry.

Divers are regularly exposed to a unique and changing environment that dentists must consider when treating such patients. This review focuses around two case studies encountered in naval dentistry: (i) diving barotrauma (pressure-induced injury related to an air space); and (ii) scuba diving mouthpiece-related oral conditions. Each condition is described by its effect on the oral cavity and in particular the teeth. Then we generally review the latest literature on the different effects of scuba diving on the diver's head, face and oral regions and emphasize methods of dental disease prevention, diagnostic tools and treatment guidelines.

Incidence, clinical characteristics and outcome of barotrauma in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Barotrauma is rare in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing mechanical ventilation. Its incidence seems increased among critically ill COVID-19 patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the incidence, risk factors and clinical outcomes of barotrauma among critically ill COVID-19 patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed was searched from March 1st, 2020 to August 31st, 2021; case series and retrospective cohort studies concerning barotrauma in adult critically ill COVID-19 patients, either hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or invasively ventilated were included. Primary outcome was the incidence of barotrauma in COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients. Secondary outcomes were clinical characteristics, ventilator parameters, mortality and length of stay between patients with and without barotrauma. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 21 studies (six case series, 15 retrospective cohorts). The overall incidence of barotrauma was 11 [95% CI: 8-14]% in critically ill COVID-19 patients, vs. 2 [1-3]% in non-COVID-19, P<0.001; the incidence in mechanically ventilated patients was 14 [11-17]% vs. 4 [2-5]% non-COVID-19 patients, P<0.001. There were no differences in demographic, clinical, ventilatory parameters between patients who did and did not develop barotrauma, while, on average, protective ventilation criteria were always respected. Among COVID-19 patients, those with barotrauma had a higher mortality (60 [55-66] vs. 48 [42-54]%, P<0.001) and a longer ICU length of stay (20 [14-26] vs. 13 [10,5-16] days, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Barotrauma is a frequent complication in critically ill COVID-19 patients and is associated with a poor prognosis. Since lung protective ventilation was delivered, the ventilatory management might not be the sole factor in the development of barotrauma.

Treatment of the lung injury of drowning: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Drowning is a cause of significant global mortality. The mechanism of injury involves inhalation of water, lung injury and hypoxia. This systematic review addressed the following question: In drowning patients with lung injury, what is the evidence from primary studies regarding treatment strategies and subsequent patient outcomes? METHODS: The search strategy utilised PRISMA guidelines. Databases searched were MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and SCOPUS. There were no restrictions on publication date or age of participants. Quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Forty-one papers were included. The quality of evidence was very low. Seventeen papers addressed the lung injury of drowning in their research question and 24 had less specific research questions, however included relevant outcome data. There were 21 studies regarding extra-corporeal life support, 14 papers covering the theme of ventilation strategies, 14 addressed antibiotic use, seven papers addressed steroid use and five studies investigating diuretic use. There were no clinical trials. One retrospective comparison of therapeutic strategies was found. There was insufficient evidence to make recommendations as to best practice when supplemental oxygen alone is insufficient. Mechanical ventilation is associated with barotrauma in drowning patients, but the evidence predates the practice of lung protective ventilation. There was insufficient evidence to make recommendations regarding adjuvant therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Treating the lung injury of drowning has a limited evidentiary basis. There is an urgent need for comparative studies of therapeutic strategies in drowning.

Effect of self-acupressure on middle ear barotrauma associated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy: A nonrandomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), a patient is exposed to pure oxygen in a chamber. While HBOT is a long-standing and well-established treatment for a wide variety of medical conditions, one of the main complications is middle ear barotrauma (MEB), which can lead to complaints of ear discomfort, stuffiness or fullness in the ear, and difficulties in equalizing ear pressure. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of self-acupressure in preventing and reducing the degree of MEB associated with HBOT. METHODS: This is a prospective nonrandomized controlled study. A sample of 152 participants will be assigned to 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio. The participants in the control group will receive conventional Valsalva and Toynbee maneuvers, while those in the experimental group will be given additional self-acupressure therapy. The acupoints used will be TE17 (Yifeng), TE21 (Ermen), SI19 (Tinggong), and GB2 (Tinghui). The Modified Teed Classification, symptoms of MEB, and overall ear discomfort levels will be assessed. Data will be analyzed using the Chi-Squared test or t test. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of self-acupressure for preventing and reducing the degree of MEB associated with HBOT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04311437. Registered on 17 March, 2020.

Pneumomediastinum and the use of hyperbaric oxygen treatment.

Pulmonary barotrauma may occur in diving and can result in a spectrum of injuries referred to as pulmonary over-inflation syndrome (POIS). Pneumomediastinum is a part of the POIS spectrum and only rarely results in respiratory symptoms. We present a case of a civilian diver who developed pneumomediastinum with respiratory symptoms which did not respond to normobaric 100% oxygen. After investigation for pneumothorax, he underwent hyperbaric oxygen treatment which resulted in significant alleviation of his symptoms. This is a novel case example of this treatment algorithm.

High Incidence of Barotrauma in Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE.: To report the high incidence of barotrauma in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to discuss its implications. DESIGN.: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING.: ICU of an academic county hospital in Los Angeles, CA admitted from March 15-June 20, 2020. PATIENTS.: 77 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. 75 patients met inclusion criteria. RESULTS.: 21% of patients with severe COVID-19 sustained barotrauma (33% of patients receiving IMV, 8% of patients receiving (NIV). There were no differences between the barotrauma and non-barotrauma groups regarding demographics, illness severity, or medications received, nor tidal volume or average/peak airway pressures in those receiving IMV. In the barotrauma group there was a greater proportion of patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulation (81% vs. 47%, p = 0.023) and ventilated using airway pressure release ventilation mode (13% vs. 0%, p = 0.043). Barotrauma was associated with increased likelihood of receiving a tracheostomy (OR 2.58 [0.23-4.9], p = 0.018]), longer median ICU length of stay (17 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.03), and longer median length of hospitalization (26 days vs. 14 days, p < 0.001). There was also a trend toward prolonged median duration of IMV (12.5 days vs 7 days, p = 0.13) and higher average mortality (56% vs 37%, p = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS.: Barotrauma is seen in 5-12% of patients with ARDS receiving IMV and is exceedingly rare in patients receiving NIV. We report a high incidence of barotrauma observed in critically ill patients with COVID-19 requiring either NIV or IMV. While there was a trend toward increased mortality in patients with barotrauma, this did not reach statistical significance. The increased incidence of barotrauma with COVID-19 may be a product of the pathophysiology of this disease state and a heightened inflammatory response causing rampant acute lung injury. Evidence-based medicine and lung-protective ventilation should remain the mainstay of treatment.

Effect of antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation medication on the risk of tympanic barotrauma in hyperbaric oxygen treatment patients, and development of a predictive model.

INTRODUCTION: Middle ear barotrauma (MEBt) is a common side effect of hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) and can result in pain, hearing loss, tinnitus and otorrhagia. The use of antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs is thought to increase the risk and severity of MEBt during HBOT. METHODS: Single centre, retrospective observational cohort study of all patients treated with HBOT over a 4-year period (between 01 January 2015 to 31 December 2018) looking at the incidence of MEBt and the concurrent use of antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant drugs. MEBt was assessed by direct otoscopy of the tympanic membrane post-HBOT and scored using the modified Teed classification. Multivariate modelling assessed the relationship between antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation drug use, age, sex, and MEBt during HBOT. RESULTS: There was no evidence that antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation drugs increase the risk of tympanic barotrauma in HBOT patients. The prevalence of MEBt was higher in female patients than in males (χ2 P = 0.004), and increased with age (χ2 P = 0.048). No MEBt was recorded in patients undergoing recompression therapy for decompression sickness or cerebral arterial gas embolism. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective single-centre study, antiplatelet and/or anticoagulation drugs did not affect the risk of MEBt, but both age and sex did, with greater prevalence of MEBt among older patients and females compared with younger patients and males. A predictive model, requiring further validation, may be helpful in assessing the likelihood of MEBt in patients undergoing HBOT.

A case of a critically injured diver with multiorgan failure and severe pulmonary overinflation syndrome in a resource-limited setting.

A diver practicing controlled emergency ascent training on the island of Guam suffered bilateral pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, coronary arterial gas embolism, and developed multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Due to limitations of available resources he was medically managed in the intensive care unit until he could be transferred to University of California San Diego for definitive management. We provide an account of our management of the patient, the pathophysiology of injury as well as a review of the safety of recreational diving skills training, current standards of practice and potential pitfalls when considering proper management of a critically injured diver.

A comparison of two hyperbaric oxygen regimens: 2.0 ATA for 120 minutes to 2.4 ATA for 90 minutes in treating radiation-induced cystitis Are these regimens equivalent?

Introduction: Hyperbaric oxygen dosing variations exist in radiation cystitis treatment. The objectives of this study were to compare response and safety rates among patients with radiation cystitis treated with different protocols: 2.0 ATA (atmospheres absolute) for 120 minutes at the University of Pennsylvania; and 2.4 ATA for 90 minutes at Hennepin Healthcare. Materials and Methods: Retrospective chart review of radiation cystitis patients treated with hyperbaric oxygen at the University of Pennsylvania (January 2010-December 2018) and Hennepin Healthcare Minnesota (January 2014-December 2018). Primary outcome was response to treatment. Complications were limited to hyperbaric-related conditions. Regression analysis was performed with ordinal logistic regression and binary logistic regression. Result: 126 patients were included in the analysis (2.0 ATA: 66, 2.4 ATA: 60). Overall response rate was 75.4% (good) and was not significantly different between protocols (good response: 2.0 ATA 72.7% vs. 2.4 ATA 78.3% p=0.74). The 2.0 ATA group required additional treatments [2.0 ATA: 45.45 ± 14.5 vs. 2.4 ATA: 40.03 ± 9.7, p<0.05]. 6.1% (2.0 ATA) and 13.3% (2.4 ATA) required tympanostomy tube placement or needle myringotomy for otic barotrauma (p=0.22). Transfusion was associated with poorer outcomes (p<0.05). Conclusion: Both groups - 2.0 ATA and 2.4 ATA - had similar response and complication rates. Blood transfusion is a negative prognostic factor for treatment outcome.

A Free Diver with Hemoptysis and Chest Pain.

[Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2019-02.asp].

[Diving and asthma: Literature review]. / Plongée sous-marine et asthme : revue de littérature.

INTRODUCTION: Scuba diving has long been contraindicated for asthmatics. Recommendations are evolving towards authorisation under certain conditions. Our objective was to review the literature on the risks associated with scuba diving among asthmatics and about recommendations on this subject. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the MEDLINE and LiSSa databases, until June 2018, in French, English or Spanish language, with the keywords "asthma AND diving" and "asthme plongée" respectively. References to the first degree were analyzed. RESULTS: We have included 65 articles. Risk of bronchospasm is well documented, particularly in cold and/or deep water, or in the event of exposure to allergens (compressor without filter). Nonasthmatic atopic divers may be at greater risk of developing bronchial hyper-reactivity. Although the theoretical risk exists, epidemiological studies do not seem to show an over-risk of barotrauma, decompression sickness or arterial gas embolism in asthmatics. French, British, American, Spanish and Australian societies agreed on the exclusion of patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma, FEV1<80%, active asthma in the last 48hours, exercise/cold asthma and poor physical fitness. CONCLUSION: A diver's examination should include a triple assessment: asthma control, number of exacerbations and treatment compliance. Homogenizing the recommendations would improve the framework for the practice of diving among asthmatics and allow larger studies in this population. Communicating the current recommendations remains important to divers, dive instructors and doctors in the context of the development of scuba diving.

Alternobaric vertigo and facial baroparesis caused by scuba diving and relieved by chewing pineapple: a case report.

Equalization of middle ear pressure is an important consideration for scuba divers. When middle ear pressure is asymmetric, a diver may experience alternobaric vertigo. Moreover, individuals with an underlying temporal bone dehiscence are predisposed to facial baroparesis. An understanding on behalf of fellow divers and emergency responders to recognize and differentiate facial baroparesis from decompression illness is critical. Misdiagnosis may lead to inappropriate treatment or unwarranted stoppage of diving. There have been a few dozen reported cases of facial baroparesis in the literature, but few have included firsthand accounts. This report describes an incidence of unilateral facial baroparesis preceded by alternobaric vertigo, with commentary from divers who witnessed the individual experiencing the facial paresis. The facial weakness in this case resolved within 15 minutes after the diver chewed on fresh pineapple. This report suggests that alternobaric vertigo may be a harbinger of facial baroparesis. Upon resurfacing divers should consider prophylactic measures that help to dilate the Eustachian tube such as chewing, yawning and swallowing in order to minimize the risk of middle ear pressure-induced vertigo or facial paresis.

Rescue therapeutic strategy combining ultra-protective mechanical ventilation with extracorporeal CO2 removal membrane in near-fatal asthma with severe pulmonary barotraumas: A case report.

RATIONALE: Mechanical ventilation of severe acute asthma is still considered a challenging issue, mainly because of the gas trapping phenomenon with the potential for life-threatening barotraumatic pulmonary complications. PATIENT CONCERNS: Herein, we describe 2 consecutive cases of near-fatal asthma for whom the recommended protective mechanical ventilation approach using low tidal volume of 6 mL/kg and small levels of PEEP was rapidly compromised by giant pneumomediastinum with extensive subcutaneousemphysema. DIAGNOSES: Near fatal asthma. INTERVENTION: A rescue therapeutic strategy combining extracorporeal CO2 removal membrane with ultra-protective extremely low tidal volume (3 mL/kg) ventilation was applied. OUTCOMES: Both patients survived hospital discharge. LESSONS: These 2 cases indicate that ECCO2R associated with ultra-protective ventilation could be an alternative to surgery in case of life-threatening barotrauma occurring under mechanical ventilation.

The future of mechanical ventilation: lessons from the present and the past.

The adverse effects of mechanical ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) arise from two main causes: unphysiological increases of transpulmonary pressure and unphysiological increases/decreases of pleural pressure during positive or negative pressure ventilation. The transpulmonary pressure-related side effects primarily account for ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) while the pleural pressure-related side effects primarily account for hemodynamic alterations. The changes of transpulmonary pressure and pleural pressure resulting from a given applied driving pressure depend on the relative elastances of the lung and chest wall. The term 'volutrauma' should refer to excessive strain, while 'barotrauma' should refer to excessive stress. Strains exceeding 1.5, corresponding to a stress above ~20 cmH2O in humans, are severely damaging in experimental animals. Apart from high tidal volumes and high transpulmonary pressures, the respiratory rate and inspiratory flow may also play roles in the genesis of VILI. We do not know which fraction of mortality is attributable to VILI with ventilation comparable to that reported in recent clinical practice surveys (tidal volume ~7.5 ml/kg, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) ~8 cmH2O, rate ~20 bpm, associated mortality ~35%). Therefore, a more complete and individually personalized understanding of ARDS lung mechanics and its interaction with the ventilator is needed to improve future care. Knowledge of functional lung size would allow the quantitative estimation of strain. The determination of lung inhomogeneity/stress raisers would help assess local stresses; the measurement of lung recruitability would guide PEEP selection to optimize lung size and homogeneity. Finding a safety threshold for mechanical power, normalized to functional lung volume and tissue heterogeneity, may help precisely define the safety limits of ventilating the individual in question. When a mechanical ventilation set cannot be found to avoid an excessive risk of VILI, alternative methods (such as the artificial lung) should be considered.