4 results on '"G. Lutzak"'
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. A69 THE EFFECT OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON CURRENT AND FUTURE ENDOSCOPIC PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT PRACTICES: A NATIONAL SURVEY OF 77 ENDOSCOPISTS
- Author
-
Jerry T. Dang, G Lutzak, Shahzeer Karmali, Clarence Wong, Warren Y. L. Sun, M El Hafid, V Mocanu, and R Sultanian
- Subjects
Face shield ,2019-20 coronavirus outbreak ,business.product_category ,Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ,business.industry ,Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) ,medicine.disease ,Pandemic ,Medicine ,Medical emergency ,business ,Healthcare providers ,Know-how ,Personal protective equipment - Abstract
Background Personal protective equipment (PPE) guidelines serve to protect healthcare providers and patients from harmful biohazards. With the rise of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19), many institutions have mandated strictly enforced endoscopic PPE guidelines. We currently do not know how current practitioners perceive these mandates or how they will influence their practice long-term. Aims We aimed to survey the PPE practices among endoscopists across Canada and compare their perceived differences in practice between the pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic eras. We hypothesize that the PPE guidelines during the pandemic will influence changes in PPE practices in endoscopy. Methods A 74-item questionnaire was emailed from June 2020 to September 2020 to all members of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterologists and the Canadian Association of General Surgeons through newsletters. The survey was created by expert consensus and distributed using the REDCap software. Survey questions collected basic demographics and differences between PPE practices pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic eras. PPE practices were categorized into four endoscopic procedure types: diagnostic or therapeutic, and upper or lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. Individual outcomes were reported as rates, or ranges when evaluating for all procedure types. Results A total of 77 respondents completed the survey with the majority of respondents aged 40–49 (34 [44.2%]) and identifying as Gastroenterologists (54 [70.1%]). Gender was evenly split (38 females [49.4%] versus 39 males [50.6%]). In the pre-pandemic era, the majority of endoscopists wore gowns (91.0–93.9%) and all endoscopists wore gloves (100%). However, the majority of endoscopists did not wear surgical masks (20.9%-31.3%), N95 respirators (1.5%-3.2%), face shields (13.4%-33.9%), eye protection (13.4%-21.3%), or hair protection (11.1%-12.5%). In the post-pandemic era, endoscopists reported a plan to dramatically change their pre-pandemic practices and adopt current PPE mandates. All endoscopists reported a plan to fully gown and glove (100%) with the majority reporting they will continue wearing surgical masks (87.7%-90.5%), face shields (57.8%-75.0%), and hair protection (50.8%-53.8%). However, the majority reported a plan to decrease universal use of N95 respirators (6.5%-23.7%) or eye protection (36.5%-40.0%). Over half of the respondents reported changing their practice from no masking pre-pandemic to implementing routine masking. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the attitudes of many endoscopists regarding future PPE use in routine endoscopy. Ongoing studies comparing the rates of transmission of hospital-acquired infections in the setting of endoscopy are needed to develop a new post-pandemic PPE consensus. Funding Agencies None
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. The Effect of Covid-19 Pandemic on Current and Future Endoscopic Personal Protective Equipment Practices: A National Survey of 77 Endoscopists.
- Author
-
Sun WYL, Verhoeff K, El Hafid M, Mocanu V, Dang JT, Lutzak G, Sultanian R, Karmali S, and Wong CK
- Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has raised awareness about the importance of personal protective equipment (PPE). We aimed to study and compare PPE practices among Canadian endoscopists before and after the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: A 74-item questionnaire was emailed from June 2020 to September 2020 to practicing endoscopists in Canada. Survey questions collected basic demographics and differences between PPE practices pre- and post-COVID-19. PPE practices were categorized into four endoscopic procedure types including upper or lower endoscopy and diagnostic or interventional. Outcomes for specific procedures were reported as rates, with ranges shown when evaluating all procedure types together., Results: A total of 77 respondents completed the survey with the majority of respondents aged 40 to 49 (44%) and identifying as Gastroenterologists (70%). Gender was evenly split (49% females versus 51% males). In the pre-pandemic era, the majority of endoscopists wore gowns (91 to 94%) and all endoscopists wore gloves (100%). However, the majority of endoscopists did not wear surgical masks (21 to 31%), face shields (13 to 34%), eye protection (13 to 21%), hair protection (11 to 13%), or N95 respirators (2 to 3%). In the post-pandemic era, more surgeons plan on wearing face shields (33 to 47%, P = 0.001 to 0.045), goggles (38.5 to 58.7%, P < 0.001), hair protection (33 to 36%, P = 0.011 to 0.024), and a trend suggests more surgeons will wear surgical masks (51 to 61%, P = 0.163 to 0.333). More endoscopists also plan on wearing N95 respirators during lower endoscopy (6 to 7%, P < 0.005)., Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the attitudes of many endoscopists regarding future PPE use in routine endoscopy. Ongoing studies are needed to inform new post-pandemic PPE consensus guidelines., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.)
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle biopsy alone vs. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with rapid onsite evaluation in pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized trial.
- Author
-
Chen YI, Chatterjee A, Berger R, Kanber Y, Wyse J, Lam E, Gan I, Auger M, Kenshil S, Telford J, Donnellan F, Quinlan J, Lutzak G, Alshamsi F, Parent J, Waschke K, Alghamdi A, Barkun J, Metrakos P, Chaudhury P, Martel M, Dorreen A, Candido K, Miller C, Adam V, Barkun A, Zogopoulos G, and Wong C
- Subjects
- Endosonography, Humans, Pancreas diagnostic imaging, Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration, Pancreatic Neoplasms diagnostic imaging
- Abstract
Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the standard in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions, in particular when combined with rapid onsite evaluation of cytopathology (ROSE). More recently, a fork-tip needle for core biopsy (FNB) has been shown to be associated with excellent diagnostic yield. EUS-FNB alone has however not been compared with EUS-FNA + ROSE in a large clinical trial. Our aim was to compare EUS-FNB alone to EUS-FNA + ROSE in solid pancreatic lesions., Methods: A multicenter, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial involving seven centers was performed. Solid pancreatic lesions referred for EUS were considered for inclusion. The primary end point was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary end points included sensitivity/specificity, mean number of needle passes, and cost., Results: 235 patients were randomized: 115 EUS-FNB alone and 120 EUS-FNA + ROSE. Overall, 217 patients had malignant histology. The diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of EUS-FNB alone was non-inferior to EUS-FNA + ROSE at 92.2 % (95 %CI 86.6 %-96.9 %) and 93.3 % (95 %CI 88.8 %-97.9 %), respectively ( P = 0.72). Diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy was 92.5 % (95 %CI 85.7 %-96.7 %) for EUS-FNB alone vs. 96.5 % (93.0 %-98.6 %) for EUS-FNA + ROSE ( P = 0.46), while specificity was 100 % in both. Adequate histological yield was obtained in 87.5 % of the EUS-FNB samples. The mean (SD) number of needle passes and procedure time favored EUS-FNB alone (2.3 [0.6] passes vs. 3.0 [1.1] passes [ P < 0.001]; and 19.3 [8.0] vs. 22.7 [10.8] minutes [ P = 0.008]). EUS-FNB alone cost on average 45 US dollars more than EUS-FNA + ROSE., Conclusion: EUS-FNB alone is non-inferior to EUS-FNA + ROSE and is associated with fewer needle passes, shorter procedure time, and excellent histological yield at comparable cost., Competing Interests: Yen-I Chen, Avijit Chatterjee, Ian Gan, and Fergal Donnellan are consultants for Boston Scientific. Alan Barkun is a consultant for Pendopharm Inc., Boston Scientific Inc., Olympus Inc., Cook Inc., and ATGen Inc. Clarence Wong is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Medtronic Medical. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Books, media, physical & digital resources
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.