Rationale and Objectives
The use of chest computed tomography (CT) in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic raises concern regarding the transmission risks to patients and staff caused by CT room contamination. Meanwhile the Center for Disease Control guidance for air exchange in between patients may heavily impact workflows. To design a portable custom isolation device to reduce imaging equipment contamination during a pandemic.
Materials and Methods
Center for Disease Control air exchange guidelines and requirements were reviewed. Device functional requirements were outlined and designed. Engineering requirements were reviewed. Methods of practice and risk mitigation plans were outlined including donning and doffing procedures and failure modes. Cost impact was assessed in terms of CT patient throughput.
Results
CT air exchange solutions and alternatives were reviewed. Multiple isolation bag device designs were considered. Several designs were custom fabricated, prototyped and reduced to practice. A final design was tested on volunteers for comfort, test-fit, air seal, and breathability. Less than 14 times enhanced patient throughput was estimated, in an ideal setting, which could more than counterbalance the cost of the device itself.
Conclusion
A novel isolation bag device is feasible for use in CT and might facilitate containment and reduce contamination in radiology departments during the COVID Pandemic.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The use of chest computed tomography (CT) during the COVID-19 pandemic may introduce contamination risk to staff and nearby patients during imaging procedures. Chest CT in patients with COVID-19 may be of tremendous clinical and epidemiological value, however, this may put pressure on CT scanners to examine large numbers of patients without spreading the infection. Chest CT can provide valuable information but it often requires 30–90 minutes of CT room decontamination and passive air exchange, which takes a heavy toll on workflow and productivity. The exact decontamination time after CT of a patient with a diagnosis or suspicion for Covid-19 depends upon air exchange rate per hour and passive airflow (
1- Kooraki S
- Hosseiny M
- Myers L
- et al.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: what the Department of Radiology should know.
,
2- Hare SS
- Jacob J
- Johnstone A
- et al.
Covid-19: is CT scanning ready to answer a diagnostic call?.
), ideally in a negative pressure setting. While advanced staff training, dedicated equipment and hallways, and pre-emptive standardized operating procedures may reduce risk to staff, a single infected patient or breach in technique can have profound implications. Risk can be mitigated by reducing the chance of viral spread by human to human transmission as well as direct transmission via imaging equipment (
1- Kooraki S
- Hosseiny M
- Myers L
- et al.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: what the Department of Radiology should know.
) via detailed decontamination procedures, cleaning all surfaces in between patients, and having all patients wear masks, or in specific settings, other personal protective equipment (PPE)-like isolation devices. Some thoracic radiologists in less CT dense countries feared the risk of contamination of CT scanners (
2- Hare SS
- Jacob J
- Johnstone A
- et al.
Covid-19: is CT scanning ready to answer a diagnostic call?.
). Designating CT scanners as either “Dirty” or “Clean” CT suites, does not resolve the fact that the “dirty” CT scanner needs a deep cleaning and a delay in between patients. One well-established strategy is to control the respiratory source of airborn or droplet transmission of infection with a face mask. An isolation bag provides a layer of security, in addition to a face mask.
The COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to completely stall radiology department throughput due to excessive delays in between patients for decontamination and airflow exchanges. In the setting of a pandemic from a droplet-transmitted novel virus and an immune-naïve population, there is a critical clinical need for cost-effective disposable PPE for the infected patient's isolation while undergoing CT procedures. This may be even more impactful for the clandestine infection which causes presymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 which may account for nearly half of all transmissions (
3He X, Lau EH, Wu P, et al. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. 2020
). Custom prototype isolation PPE devices for the patient were designed, test fit, and custom fabricated. Center for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines are reviewed as relevant to CT decontamination and isolation. A portable isolation bag device for patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic upper respiratory infectious diseases was designed to reduce contamination in imaging suites, which could facilitate containment during the COVID pandemic.
DISCUSSION
Previous use of similar containment devices in CT, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography (PET), have focused on either a high-tech, complex, bulky, and expensive high-level containment chamber or isolation pod (
Fig 4) (
8- Molton JS
- Leek FA
- Ng LH
- et al.
A novel approach to CT, MR, and PET examination of patients with infections requiring stringent airborne precautions.
), or a super low-tech medical waste bag (
6- Amalou A
- Türkbey B
- Sanford T
- et al.
Targeted early chest CT in COVID-19 outbreaks as diagnostic tool for containment of the pandemic—a multinational opinion.
). The former was designed for critical care use or transport in field or military settings, whereas the latter was used to reduce risk in the COVID-19 outbreak in Hubei Province to enhance CT in screening in fever clinics. The ability of such devices to contain infectious agents such as Ebola, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), MERS, multidrug resistant tuberculosis or SARS-CoV-2 requires arresting contact, fomite, droplet, and respiratory aerosols. However, the bulky isolation chamber is not as ergonomic nor conveniently portable as the bag. SARS-CoV-2 requires such droplet and aerosol precautions, and a disposable cost-effective device could augment patient and staff safety, although this is speculative. Although also not directly proven, the prototype device described herein may have less risk for contaminated air escaping into the CT room or surrounding environment, compared to using simply a standard medical waste bag. Any more substantial non-disposable device or chamber might also cause more artifacts on CT or MRI than a thin disposable plastic material, and may reduce the signal to noise ratio more than the simple low-profile plastic bag. The plastic bag should also not influence radiation dose to the patient, compared to the isolation chamber, which causes increased radiation (via scatter or dose modulation) (
).
The CDC issues guidelines for patients with infectious diseases such as measles, varicella, pneumonias due to resistant bacteria, and multidrug resistant tuberculosis, SARS CoV-1, MERS, Ebola, and now COVID-19 (
1- Kooraki S
- Hosseiny M
- Myers L
- et al.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: what the Department of Radiology should know.
,
2- Hare SS
- Jacob J
- Johnstone A
- et al.
Covid-19: is CT scanning ready to answer a diagnostic call?.
). Radiology departments traditionally try to accommodate the uncertainties from imaging such patients by performing imaging at the end of the workday, in order to allow for longer air exchange. However, this delays the CT, and also CT in some hospitals has a 24-hour workday. The CDC has issued guidelines for length of time to allow for passive air exchange after imaging a patient with COVID-19 (
2- Hare SS
- Jacob J
- Johnstone A
- et al.
Covid-19: is CT scanning ready to answer a diagnostic call?.
). Whatever the time recommended for passive air exchange, this can become cumbersome and inefficient during a pandemic outbreak, when there may be too many patients to let them all wait until the end of the workday, or to wait in between patients.
Broad use of CT has impacted patient isolation in outbreak settings, however only a few patients can be done per shift depending upon air exchanging rates (
1- Kooraki S
- Hosseiny M
- Myers L
- et al.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak: what the Department of Radiology should know.
,
2- Hare SS
- Jacob J
- Johnstone A
- et al.
Covid-19: is CT scanning ready to answer a diagnostic call?.
). The goal of using disposable personal protective isolation devices in this setting would be to try to enhance patient safety and staff protection, while avoiding major slowdowns of any COVID-1-specific CT scanner in cost-effective fashion (
3He X, Lau EH, Wu P, et al. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. 2020
).
Assuming a 2-hour delay for decontamination and ventilation and a 10-minute fast low-dose scan, a single emergency COVID-19-specific CT scanner might be able to scan about 10 patients in a 24-hour working day. Let's assume the isolation bag enables a fast and safe low-dose chest CT every 10 minutes (with preprocedure and postprocedure preparations taking place next door). This would allow 144 patients to be scanned in the same 24-hour period. This translate into over 14 times greater patient throughput per day, with the addition of the bag PPE in a continuously running COVID-19 dedicated CT. Nearly 15-fold enhanced productivity is far greater than any expected cost for a disposable device made from inexpensive and easily sourced materials. The population impact and cost-effectiveness of the enhanced use of CT as a result of bag use during a COVID-19 outbreak is reviewed elsewhere (
3He X, Lau EH, Wu P, et al. Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19. 2020
).
In addition to reducing contamination of imaging rooms and radiology departments, the disposable isolation bag may meet an urgent clinical need brought about by unprecedented pandemic. Such a cost-effective device might prove useful in any situation where the CT might not reside in a negative pressure setting, which may be common in both inpatient and outpatient imaging centers. Such issues may have added relevance in countries without resources requisite for construction of negative pressure ventilation in radiology or interventional radiology departments. The especially contagious SARS-CoV-2 virus potentially remains viable for several days on surfaces after nebulization (
10- van Doremalen N
- Bushmaker T
- Morris DH
- et al.
Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-CoV-1.
), such as may occur in contaminated CT rooms. Future analysis may assess the ability to successfully contain nebulized virus in vitro with this disposable and cost-effective isolation device. Such a device might address an unmet practical need during a pandemic, such as for nebulized medications, outpatient doctor office visits, or acute care settings. Given the wide concern for asymptomatic viral contagiousness, such a device could also be used uniformly to enhance cleanliness in a standard health-care setting such as radiology, magnetic resonance imaging, PET, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, outpatient surgery, endoscopy, plastic surgery, or even tattoo parlors, salons, or other back to work settings. This brief description of a prototype isolation device for reduction in contamination requires clinical translation. The limited overview of ventilation for radiology related to COVID-19 is a superficial introduction for the clinician that requires more in-depth communications and a multidisciplinary understanding involving facilities management, hospital epidemiology, environmental safety officers, and clinical leadership. Given the benefits of ongoing COVID-19 awareness, radiology department pandemic preparations (
9Management strategy of novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in the Radiology Department: a Chinese experience.
11- M Mossa-Basha
- CC Meltzer
- DC Kim
- et al.
Radiology Department preparedness for COVID-19: radiology scientific expert panel.
12- Huang Z
- Zhao S
- Li Z
- et al.
The battle against Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): emergency management and infection control in a Radiology Department.
) should be attentive to airflow in CT rooms, and should consider all options for risk mitigation for staff and patients.
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 25, 2020
Accepted:
May 18,
2020
Received in revised form:
May 17,
2020
Received:
May 12,
2020
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The Association of University Radiologists.