Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 3 de 3
1.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol ; 13(6): 973-978, 2023 06.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37100587

A patient-reported history of penicillin allergy is a common label with a prevalence of about 10%. However, as many as 95% of patients reporting a penicillin allergy do not have a true immunoglobin-E (IgE)-mediated allergic reaction. Unfortunately, penicillin allergy mislabeling is problematic, leading to inappropriate antibiotic use and negative consequences, such as adverse drug events, suboptimal outcomes, and increased costs. As physicians who treat patients of all ages for common sinonasal pathology in the clinic and operating room in addition to frequently providing testing and management of allergic diseases, rhinologists are well positioned to aid in delabeling patients with inaccurate penicillin allergies. This viewpoint highlights the consequences of inaccurate penicillin allergy designation in the clinic and perioperative period and explores misconceptions regarding cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins. Opportunities are explored for shared decision-making with colleagues in other specialties, such as anesthesiology, and practical recommendations are provided to aid rhinologists when faced with a patient who holds a questionable history of penicillin allergy. Rhinologists can play an active role in delabeling patients with inaccurate penicillin allergies with the goal of ensuring appropriate antibiotic use for future medical encounters.


Drug Hypersensitivity , Hypersensitivity , Humans , Penicillins/adverse effects , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Cephalosporins/adverse effects
2.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol ; 131(1): 59-70, 2022 Jan.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33840220

OBJECTIVES: Topical vasoconstrictors and intravenous tranexamic acid (IV TXA) are safe and efficacious to decrease bleeding and improve the surgical field during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). The purpose of this study was to investigate practice patterns, awareness of clinical evidence, and comfort levels among anesthesia providers regarding these hemostatic agents for ESS. METHODS: A total of 767 attending anesthesiologists, residents, and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) at 5 United States academic centers were invited to participate in a survey regarding their experience with IV TXA and 3 topical vasoconstrictor medications (oxymetazoline, epinephrine, and cocaine) during ESS. RESULTS: 330 (47%) anesthesia providers responded to the electronic survey. 113 (97%) residents, 92 (83%) CRNAs, and 52 (68%) attendings managed 5 or fewer ESS cases per month. Two-thirds of providers had not reviewed efficacy or safety literature for these hemostatic agents. Oxymetazoline was perceived safest, followed by epinephrine, IV TXA, and cocaine. Respondents considered potential side effects over surgical field visibility when selecting agents. The majority of providers had no formal training on these agents for ESS, but indicated interest in educational opportunities. CONCLUSION: Many anesthesia providers are unfamiliar with safety and efficacy literature regarding agents used to improve hemostasis for ESS, highlighting a need for development of relevant educational resources. Rhinologic surgeons have an opportunity to communicate with anesthesia colleagues on the use of hemostatic agents to improve the surgical field during ESS.


Anesthesiology , Antifibrinolytic Agents/administration & dosage , Endoscopy , Paranasal Sinuses/surgery , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Tranexamic Acid/administration & dosage , Vasoconstrictor Agents/administration & dosage , Administration, Intravenous , Administration, Topical , Cocaine/administration & dosage , Epinephrine/administration & dosage , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures/methods , Oxymetazoline/administration & dosage
3.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol ; 10(2): 153-158, 2020 02.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31793216

BACKGROUND: Inhalational anesthesia and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) are techniques used for maintenance of general anesthesia for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Growing evidence exists that TIVA may be associated with decreased bleeding and improved surgical fields, yet data suggest it is used in a minority of sinus surgery cases. The objective of this study was to investigate perceptions and approaches to anesthetic maintenance techniques in ESS among anesthesia providers. METHODS: A total of 719 anesthesiology residents, faculty, and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) at 3 tertiary academic centers in the United States were invited to participate in a survey of considerations and practice patterns for inhalational anesthesia and TIVA for ESS. RESULTS: Responses were received from 200 participants (28%). Sixty-five percent of respondents reported a lack of familiarity with current literature on TIVA for ESS. Many considered factors other than surgical field visualization when choosing a maintenance technique. Most were comfortable with performing TIVA but stated they would participate in additional training. CONCLUSION: The majority of anesthesiology providers were unaware of the existing literature demonstrating advantage in improved surgical visualization with TIVA. Many used a combination of inhaled and intravenous anesthetics for maintenance. These findings suggest that future opportunities may exist to develop education, training, and practice approaches specific to anesthetic techniques for ESS.


Anesthesia, Inhalation , Anesthesia, Intravenous , Anesthesiologists , Endoscopy/methods , Paranasal Sinuses/surgery , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires
...