Summary Novel coronavirus 2019 is a single‐stranded, ribonucleic acid virus that has led to an international pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019. Clinical data from the Chinese outbreak have been reported, but experiences and recommendations from clinical practice during the Italian outbreak have not. We report the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak on regional and national healthcare infrastructure. We also report on recommendations based on clinical experiences of managing patients throughout Italy. In particular, we describe key elements of clinical management, including: safe oxygen therapy; airway management; personal protective equipment; and non‐technical aspects of caring for patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019. Only through planning, training and team working will clinicians and healthcare systems be best placed to deal with the many complex implications of this new pandemic.

European Society of Anaesthesiology.

After the first European Position Consensus Meeting on DISE and its update, consensus was confirmed for indications, required preliminary examinations, where to perform DISE, technical equipment required, staffing, local anaesthesia, nasal decongestion, other medications, patient positioning, basics and special diagnostic manoeuvres, drugs and observation windows. So far, no consensus could be reached on a scoring and classification system. However, regarding this aim, the idea of an essential classification, such as VOTE with the possibility of its graded implementation of information and descriptions, seems to be the best way to reach a universal consensus on DISE classification at this stage. A common DISE language is mandatory, and attempts to come to a generally accepted system should be pursued.

IMPORTANCETo date, no consensus exists regarding optimal perioperative care of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) undergoing upper airway (UA) surgery. These patients are at risk related to anesthesia and postoperative analgesia, among other risks associated with difficult airway control, and may require intensified perioperative management.OBJECTIVE To provide a consensus-based guideline by reviewing available literature and collecting expert opinion during an international consensus meeting with experts from relevant speciliaties. EVIDENCE REVIEWIn a consensus meeting conducted on April 4, 2018, a total of 47 questions covering preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care were formulated by 12 international experts with extensive clinical experience in the field of UA surgery for OSA. Systematic literature searches were performed by an independent information specialist and 6 researchers according to the Oxford and GRADE systems, and 164 articles published on or before December 31, 2011, were included in the analysis. Two moderators chaired the meeting according to the Amsterdam Delphi Method, including iteration of literature conclusions, expert discussion, and voting rounds. Consensus was reached when there was 70% or more agreement among experts.FINDINGS Of 47 questions, 35 led to a recommendation or statement. The remaining 12 questions provided no additional information and were excluded in the judgment of experts. Consensus was reached for 32 recommendations. For 1 question there was less than 70% agreement among experts; therefore, consensus was not achieved. Highlights of these recommendations include (1) postoperative bleeding is a complication described for all types of UA surgery; (2) OSA is a relative risk factor for difficult mask ventilation and intubation, and plans for difficult airway management should be considered and implemented; (3) safe perioperative care should be provided, with aspects such as OSA severity, adherent use of positive airway pressure, type of surgery, and comorbidities taken into account; (4) although there is no direct evidence to date, in patients undergoing UA surgery, preoperative treatment with positive airway pressure may reduce the risk of postoperative airway complications; and (5) alternative pain management options perioperatively to reduce opioid use should be considered.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This consensus contains 35 recommendations and statements on the perioperative care of patients with OSA undergoing UA surgery and may be used as a guideline in daily practice.

Understanding the sites of pharyngeal collapse is mandatory for surgical treatment decision-making in obstructive sleep-apnea-hypopnea syndrome patients. Drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) allows for the direct observation of the upper airway during sedative-induced sleep. In order to re-create snoring and apnea patterns related to a spontaneous sleep situation, the authors used a target-controlled infusion (TCI) sleep endoscopy (DISE-TCI), comparing this technique to conventional DISE, in which sedation was reached by a manual bolus injection. The authors conducted a prospective, randomized, unicenter study. The apneic event observation and its correlation with pharyngeal collapse patterns is the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints are defined as stability and safety of sedation plans of DISE-TCI technique. From January 2009 to June 2009, 40 OSAHS patients were included in the study and randomized allocated in two groups: the bolus injection conventional DISE group and the DISE-TCI group. We recorded the complete apnea event at the oropharynx and hypopharynx levels in 4 patients of the conventional DISE group (20%) and in 17 patients of the DISE-TCI group (85%) (P < 0.0001). Two patients needed oxygen in the conventional DISE group because of severe desaturation that resulted from the first bolus of propofol (1 mg/kg) (P = 0.4872 ns). We recorded the instability of the sedation plan in 13 patients from the conventional DISE group (65%) and 1 patient from the DISE-TCI group (5%) (P = 0.0001). Our results suggest that the DISE-TCI technique should be the first choice in performing sleep endoscopy because of its increased accuracy, stability and safety.

Purpose: To evaluate, using drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE), sites of upper airway obstruction and pattern of collapse in patients over 65 years old affected by obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). To compare sites and pattern of collapse of elderly patients with a group of patients younger than 65 years. Methods: A group of 55 patients aged over 65 years old were enrolled in this prospective study. Fifty patients under 65 years old were collected in the control group.

Drug-Induced Sedation Endoscopy (DISE) consists of the direct observation of the upper airways during sedative-induced sleep, allowing the identification of the sites of pharyngeal collapse, which is the main pathological event in Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA). The Authors have compared Target Controlled Infusion (TCI) sedation endoscopy (TCI-DISE) technique to conventional DISE (CDISE), performed by a manual bolus injection of sedative agent, to recreate accurately and safely snoring and apnea patterns comparable to natural sleep. The authors conducted a prospective, randomized, long-term study and a retrospective analysis of surgical outcomes. The apnea-event observation and its correlation with pharyngeal collapse patterns is the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints are defined as stability and safety of sedation plan of DISE-TCI technique. From January 2009 to January 2011, OSA patients were included in the study and randomly allocated into two groups: the bolus injection conventional DISE group and the TCI-DISE group. Third endpoint is to compare the surgical outcomes enrolling OSA patients from January 2009 to June 2015. We recorded the complete apnea-event at oropharynx and hypopharynx levels in 15/50 pts in conventional DISE group (30%) and in 99/123 pts in TCI-DISE group (81%) (p < 0.0001). Four pts needed oxygen in conventional DISE group because a severe desaturation occurred during the first bolus of propofol (1 mg/kg) (p = 0.4872 ns). We recorded instability of the sedation plan in 13 patients of conventional DISE group (65%) and 1 patient of the TCI-DISE group (5%) (p = 0.0001). In 37 TCI-DISE group surgical patients we reported a significant reduction of postoperative AHI (from 42.7 ± 20.2 to 11.4 ± 10.3) in comparison with postoperative AHI in 15 C-DISE group surgical patients (from 41.3 ± 23.4 to 20.4 ± 15.5) (p = 0.05). Our results suggest the DISE-TCI technique as first choice in performing sleep-endoscopy because of its increased accuracy, stability and safety. However, it is mandatory an accurate assessment of PSG/PM, which allows us to differentiate OSA patients in whom UA anatomical abnormalities are predominant in comparison with not-anatomical pathophysiologic factors, achieving good surgical patient's selection and outcomes as a consequence.

No abstract