Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused unprecedented demand and burden on emergency health care services in New York City. We aim to describe our experience providing acute stroke care at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) and the impact of the pandemic on the quality of care for patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed data from a quality improvement registry of consecutive AIS patients at New York University Langone Health's CSC between 06/01/2019-05/15/2020. During the early stages of the pandemic, the acute stroke process was modified to incorporate COVID-19 screening, testing, and other precautionary measures. We compared stroke quality metrics including treatment times and discharge outcomes of AIS patients during the pandemic (03/012020-05/152020) compared with a historical pre-pandemic group (6/1/2019-2/29/2020). RESULTS:A total of 754 patients (pandemic-120; pre-pandemic-634) were admitted with a principal diagnosis of AIS; 198 (26.3%) received alteplase and/or mechanical thrombectomy. Despite longer median door to head CT times (16 vs 12 minutes; p = 0.05) and a trend towards longer door to groin puncture times (79.5 vs. 71 min, p = 0.06), the time to alteplase administration (36 vs 35 min; p = 0.83), door to reperfusion times (103 vs 97 min, p = 0.18) and defect-free care (95.2% vs 94.7%; p = 0.84) were similar in the pandemic and pre-pandemic groups. Successful recanalization rates (TICI≥2b) were also similar (82.6% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.48). After adjusting for stroke severity, age and a prior history of transient ischemic attack/stroke, pandemic patients had increased discharge mortality (adjusted OR 2.90 95% CI 1.77 - 7.17, p = 0.021) CONCLUSION: Despite unprecedented demands on emergency healthcare services, early multidisciplinary efforts to adapt the acute stroke treatment process resulted in keeping the stroke quality time metrics close to pre-pandemic levels. Future studies will be needed with a larger cohort comparing discharge and long-term outcomes between pre-pandemic and pandemic AIS patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has helped many patients achieve functional independence. The effect of time-to-treatment based in specific epochs and as related to Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) has not been established. The goal of the study was to evaluate the association between last known normal (LKN)-to-puncture time and good functional outcome. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing MT for large vessel occlusion. We used binary logistic regression models adjusted for age, Modified Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia score, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and noncontrast CT ASPECTS to assess the association between LKN-to-puncture time and favorable outcome defined as Modified Rankin Score 0-2 on discharge. RESULTS:Among 421 patients, 328 were included in analysis. Increased LKN-to-puncture time was associated with decreased probability of good functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] ratio per 15-minute delay = .98; 95% confidence interval [CI], .97-.99; P = .001). This was especially true when LKN-puncture time was 0-6 hours (aOR per 15-minute delay = .94; 95% CI, .89-.99; P = .05) or ASPECTS 8-10 (aOR = .98; 95% CI, .97-.99; P = .002) as opposed to when LKN-puncture time was 6-24 hours (aOR per 15-minute delay = .99; 95% CI, .97-1.00; P = .16) and ASPECTS <8 (aOR = .98; 95% CI, .93-1.03; P = .37). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Decreased LKN-groin puncture time improves outcome particularly in those with good ASPECTS presenting within 6 hours. Strategies to decrease reperfusion times should be investigated, particularly in those in the early time window and with good ASPECTS.

The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically affected the operations of New York City hospitals during March and April of 2020. This article describes the transformation of a neurology division at a 450-bed tertiary care hospital in a multi-ethnic community in Brooklyn during this initial wave of COVID-19. In lieu of a mass redeployment of staff to internal medicine teams, we report a novel method for a neurology division to participate in a hospital's expansion of care for patients with COVID-19 while maintaining existing team structures and their inherent supervisory and interpersonal support mechanisms.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic has led to challenges in provision of care, clinical assessment and communication with families. The unique considerations associated with evaluation of catastrophic brain injury and death by neurologic criteria in patients with Covid-19 infection have not been examined. METHODS:We describe the evaluation of six patients hospitalized at a health network in New York City in April 2020 who had Covid-19, were comatose and had absent brainstem reflexes. RESULTS:Four males and two females with a median age of 58.5 (IQR 47-68) were evaluated for catastrophic brain injury due to stroke and/or global anoxic injury at a median of 14 days (IQR 13-18) after admission for acute respiratory failure due to Covid-19. All patients had hypotension requiring vasopressors and had been treated with sedative/narcotic drips for ventilator dyssynchrony. Among these patients, 5 had received paralytics. Apnea testing was performed for 1 patient due to the decision to withdraw treatment (n = 2), concern for inability to tolerate testing (n = 2) and observation of spontaneous respirations (n = 1). The apnea test was aborted due to hypoxia and hypotension. After ancillary testing, death was declared in three patients based on neurologic criteria and in three patients based on cardiopulmonary criteria (after withdrawal of support (n = 2) or cardiopulmonary arrest (n = 1)). A family member was able to visit 5/6 patients prior to cardiopulmonary arrest/discontinuation of organ support. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:It is feasible to evaluate patients with catastrophic brain injury and declare brain death despite the Covid-19 pandemic, but this requires unique considerations.

BACKGROUND:As the COVID-19 pandemic developed, reports of neurological dysfunctions spanning the central and peripheral nervous systems have emerged. The spectrum of acute neurological dysfunctions may implicate direct viral invasion, para-infectious complications, neurological manifestations of systemic diseases, or co-incident neurological dysfunction in the context of high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. A rapid and pragmatic approach to understanding the prevalence, phenotypes, pathophysiology and prognostic implications of COVID-19 neurological syndromes is urgently needed. METHODS:The Global Consortium to Study Neurological dysfunction in COVID-19 (GCS-NeuroCOVID), endorsed by the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS), was rapidly established to address this need in a tiered approach. Tier-1 consists of focused, pragmatic, low-cost, observational common data element (CDE) collection, which can be launched immediately at many sites in the first phase of this pandemic and is designed for expedited ethical board review with waiver-of-consent. Tier 2 consists of prospective functional and cognitive outcomes assessments with more detailed clinical, laboratory and radiographic data collection that would require informed consent. Tier 3 overlays Tiers 1 and 2 with experimental molecular, electrophysiology, pathology and imaging studies with longitudinal outcomes assessment and would require centers with specific resources. A multicenter pediatrics core has developed and launched a parallel study focusing on patients ages <18 years. Study sites are eligible for participation if they provide clinical care to COVID-19 patients and are able to conduct patient-oriented research under approval of an internal or global ethics committee. Hospitalized pediatric and adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 and with acute neurological signs or symptoms are eligible to participate. The primary study outcome is the overall prevalence of neurological complications among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, which will be calculated by pooled estimates of each neurological finding divided by the average census of COVID-19 positive patients over the study period. Secondary outcomes include: in-hospital, 30 and 90-day morality, discharge modified Rankin score, ventilator-free survival, ventilator days, discharge disposition, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS:In a one-month period (3/27/20-4/27/20) the GCS-NeuroCOVID consortium was able to recruit 71 adult study sites, representing 17 countries and 5 continents and 34 pediatrics study sites. CONCLUSIONS:This is one of the first large-scale global research collaboratives urgently assembled to evaluate acute neurological events in the context of a pandemic. The innovative and pragmatic tiered study approach has allowed for rapid recruitment and activation of numerous sites across the world-an approach essential to capture real-time critical neurological data to inform treatment strategies in this pandemic crisis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:With the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the current worldwide pandemic, there is mounting evidence that patients affected by the illness may develop clinically significant coagulopathy with thromboembolic complications including ischemic stroke. However, there is limited data on the clinical characteristics, stroke mechanism, and outcomes of patients who have a stroke and COVID-19. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with ischemic stroke who were hospitalized between March 15, 2020, and April 19, 2020, within a major health system in New York, the current global epicenter of the pandemic. We compared the clinical characteristics of stroke patients with a concurrent diagnosis of COVID-19 to stroke patients without COVID-19 (contemporary controls). In addition, we compared patients to a historical cohort of patients with ischemic stroke discharged from our hospital system between March 15, 2019, and April 15, 2019 (historical controls). RESULTS:<0.001). When compared with contemporary controls, COVID-19 positive patients had higher admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and higher peak D-dimer levels. When compared with historical controls, COVID-19 positive patients were more likely to be younger men with elevated troponin, higher admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, and higher erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Patients with COVID-19 and stroke had significantly higher mortality than historical and contemporary controls. CONCLUSIONS:We observed a low rate of imaging-confirmed ischemic stroke in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Most strokes were cryptogenic, possibly related to an acquired hypercoagulability, and mortality was increased. Studies are needed to determine the utility of therapeutic anticoagulation for stroke and other thrombotic event prevention in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND:Little data exists on outcomes of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in nonagenarians. We aimed to compare the procedural and discharge outcomes of MT for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in nonagenarians versus younger patients. METHODS:Procedural outcomes and discharge disposition were compared in propensity score-matched groups of nonagenarians versus patients aged≤69 with AIS who underwent MT. Patients aged 70-89 were excluded in order to compare nonagenarians to a younger cohort that most closely approximates the age of patients in the seminal MT trials. Good discharge disposition was defined as a discharge to home or acute rehabilitation. RESULTS:Of 3010 AIS patients, 46/297(16%) nonagenarians underwent MT compared to 159/1337(12%) aged≤69 (P = 0.091). Of 78 propensity score-matched patients (N = 39 ≥90, N = 39 ≤69), the median admission NIHSS was 22 versus 20, median ASPECTS was 9 versus 9, pre-stroke mRS<4 was 82% versus 87%, 18% versus 8% received IV tPA, and mTICI≥2b was 90% versus 90%, respectively (all P>0.05). Revascularization time (569 versus 372 min), door to groin puncture time (82 versus 71 min) and groin puncture to revascularization times (39 versus 24 min) were similar in between nonagenarians and ≤69, respectively (both P>0.05). Symptomatic ICH (2.6% versus 10.3%; p = 0.165) and in-hospital death rates (10% vs 26%; p = 0.077) trended lower among nonagenarians versus aged≤69. Good discharge disposition occurred in 44% of nonagenarians versus 51% aged≤69 years (p = 0.496). CONCLUSIONS:In propensity score analysis, 90% of nonagenarians achieved successful recanalization and almost half (44%) were discharged to home/acute rehabilitation, which was similar to a younger (aged≤69 years) cohort.