Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:We sought to review the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS:We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase between December 1, 2019 and November 18, 2020 to identify case reports or series of patients who had COVID-19 diagnosed based on positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or serologic testing and had CSF testing due to a neurologic symptom. RESULTS:We identified 242 relevant documents which included 430 patients with COVID-19 who had acute neurological symptoms prompting CSF testing. Of those, 321 (75%) patients had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). Of 304 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR, there were 17 (6%) whose test was positive, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). The majority (13/17, 76%) of these patients were admitted to the hospital because of neurological symptoms. Of 58 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibody, 7 (12%) had positive antibodies with evidence of intrathecal synthesis, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the CNS. Of 132 patients who had oligoclonal bands evaluated, 3 (2%) had evidence of intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of 77 patients tested for autoimmune antibodies in the CSF, 4 (5%) had positive findings. CONCLUSION:Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare. Most neurological complications associated with SARS- CoV-2 are unlikely to be related to direct viral neuroinvasion.

BACKGROUND:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has severely affected ICUs and critical care health-care providers (HCPs) worldwide. RESEARCH QUESTION:How do regional differences and perceived lack of ICU resources affect critical care resource use and the well-being of HCPs? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS:Between April 23 and May 7, 2020, we electronically administered a 41-question survey to interdisciplinary HCPs caring for patients critically ill with COVID-19. The survey was distributed via critical care societies, research networks, personal contacts, and social media portals. Responses were tabulated according to World Bank region. We performed multivariate log-binomial regression to assess factors associated with three main outcomes: limiting mechanical ventilation (MV), changes in CPR practices, and emotional distress and burnout. RESULTS:We included 2,700 respondents from 77 countries, including physicians (41%), nurses (40%), respiratory therapists (11%), and advanced practice providers (8%). The reported lack of ICU nurses was higher than that of intensivists (32% vs 15%). Limiting MV for patients with COVID-19 was reported by 16% of respondents, was lowest in North America (10%), and was associated with reduced ventilator availability (absolute risk reduction [ARR], 2.10; 95% CI, 1.61-2.74). Overall, 66% of respondents reported changes in CPR practices. Emotional distress or burnout was high across regions (52%, highest in North America) and associated with being female (mechanical ventilation, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.33), being a nurse (ARR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.53), reporting a shortage of ICU nurses (ARR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.33), reporting a shortage of powered air-purifying respirators (ARR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.09-1.55), and experiencing poor communication from supervisors (ARR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.16-1.46). INTERPRETATION:Our findings demonstrate variability in ICU resource availability and use worldwide. The high prevalence of provider burnout and its association with reported insufficient resources and poor communication from supervisors suggest a need for targeted interventions to support HCPs on the front lines.

The ESM was updated in the original article to replace an incorrect version that was published with tracked changes notes.

Brain death, or death by neurological criteria (BD/DNC), has been accepted conceptually, medically and legally for decades. Nevertheless, some areas remain controversial or understudied, pointing to a need for focused research to advance the field. Multiple recent contributions have increased our understanding of BD/DNC, solidified our practice and provided guidance where previously lacking. There have also been important developments on a global scale, including in low-to-middle income countries such as in South America. Although variability in protocols and practice still exists, new efforts are underway to reduce inconsistencies and better train practitioners in accurate and sound BD/DNC determination. Various legal challenges have required formal responses from national societies, and the American Academy of Neurology has filled this void with much needed guidance. Questions remain regarding concepts such as 'whole brain' versus 'brainstem' death, and the intersection of BD/DNC and rubrics of medical futility. These concepts are the subject of this review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Various patterns of leukoencephalopathy have been described in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this article, we aimed to describe the clinical and imaging features of acute disseminated leukoencephalopathy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and the imaging evolution during a short-term follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We identified and reviewed the clinical data, laboratory results, imaging findings, and outcomes for 8 critically ill patients with COVID-19 with acute disseminated leukoencephalopathy. RESULTS:All patients demonstrated multiple areas of white matter changes in both cerebral hemispheres; 87.5% (7/8) of patients had a posterior predilection. Four patients (50%) had short-term follow-up imaging within a median of 17 days after the first MR imaging; they developed brain atrophy, and their white matter lesions evolved into necrotizing cystic cavitations. All (8/8) patients had inflammatory cytokine release syndrome as demonstrated by elevated interleukin-6, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and ferritin levels. Most (7/8; 87.5%) patients were on prolonged ventilator support (median, 44.5 days; interquartile range, 20.5 days). These patients had poor functional outcomes (6/8 [75%] patients were discharged with mRS 5) and high mortality (2/8, 25%). CONCLUSIONS:Critically ill patients with COVID-19 can develop acute disseminated leukoencephalopathy that evolves into cystic degeneration of white matter lesions with brain atrophy during a short period, which we dubbed virus-associated necrotizing disseminated acute leukoencephalopathy. This may be the result of COVID-19-related endothelial injury, cytokine storm, or thrombotic microangiopathy.

OBJECTIVE:To determine the prevalence and associated mortality of well-defined neurologic diagnoses among COVID-19 patients, we prospectively followed hospitalized SARS-Cov-2 positive patients and recorded new neurologic disorders and hospital outcomes. METHODS:We conducted a prospective, multi-center, observational study of consecutive hospitalized adults in the NYC metropolitan area with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The prevalence of new neurologic disorders (as diagnosed by a neurologist) was recorded and in-hospital mortality and discharge disposition were compared between COVID-19 patients with and without neurologic disorders. RESULTS:Of 4,491 COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the study timeframe, 606 (13.5%) developed a new neurologic disorder in a median of 2 days from COVID-19 symptom onset. The most common diagnoses were: toxic/metabolic encephalopathy (6.8%), seizure (1.6%), stroke (1.9%), and hypoxic/ischemic injury (1.4%). No patient had meningitis/encephalitis, or myelopathy/myelitis referable to SARS-CoV-2 infection and 18/18 CSF specimens were RT-PCR negative for SARS-CoV-2. Patients with neurologic disorders were more often older, male, white, hypertensive, diabetic, intubated, and had higher sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores (all P<0.05). After adjusting for age, sex, SOFA-scores, intubation, past history, medical complications, medications and comfort-care-status, COVID-19 patients with neurologic disorders had increased risk of in-hospital mortality (Hazard Ratio[HR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.17-1.62, P<0.001) and decreased likelihood of discharge home (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.85, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Neurologic disorders were detected in 13.5% of COVID-19 patients and were associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality and decreased likelihood of discharge home. Many observed neurologic disorders may be sequelae of severe systemic illness.

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) can be a devastating complication of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We aimed to assess risk factors associated with ICH in this population. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to NYU Langone Health system between March 1 and April 27 2020 with a positive nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction test result and presence of primary nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage or hemorrhagic conversion of ischemic stroke on neuroimaging. Patients with intracranial procedures, malignancy, or vascular malformation were excluded. We used regression models to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR, 95% CI) of the association between ICH and covariates. We also used regression models to determine association between ICH and mortality. Among 3824 patients admitted with COVID-19, 755 patients had neuroimaging and 416 patients were identified after exclusion criteria were applied. The mean (standard deviation) age was 69.3 (16.2), 35.8% were women, and 34.9% were on therapeutic anticoagulation. ICH occurred in 33 (7.9%) patients. Older age, non-Caucasian race, respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and therapeutic anticoagulation were associated with ICH on univariate analysis (p < 0.01 for each variable). In adjusted regression models, anticoagulation use was associated with a five-fold increased risk of ICH (OR 5.26, 95% CI 2.33-12.24, p < 0.001). ICH was associated with increased mortality (adjusted OR 2.6, 95 % CI 1.2-5.9). Anticoagulation use is associated with increased risk of ICH in patients with COVID-19. Further investigation is required to elucidate underlying mechanisms and prevention strategies in this population.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:While the thrombotic complications of COVID-19 have been well described, there are limited data on clinically significant bleeding complications including hemorrhagic stroke. The clinical characteristics, underlying stroke mechanism, and outcomes in this particular subset of patients are especially salient as therapeutic anticoagulation becomes increasingly common in the treatment and prevention of thrombotic complications of COVID-19. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with hemorrhagic stroke (both non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage and spontaneous non-aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage) who were hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, within a major healthcare system in New York, during the coronavirus pandemic. Patients with hemorrhagic stroke on admission and who developed hemorrhage during hospitalization were both included. We compared the clinical characteristics of patients with hemorrhagic stroke and COVID-19 to those without COVID-19 admitted to our hospital system between March 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020 (contemporary controls), and March 1, 2019, and May 15, 2019 (historical controls). Demographic variables and clinical characteristics between the individual groups were compared using Fischer's exact test for categorical variables and nonparametric test for continuous variables. We adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni method. RESULTS:During the study period in 2020, out of 4071 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19, we identified 19 (0.5%) with hemorrhagic stroke. Of all COVID-19 with hemorrhagic stroke, only three had isolated non-aneurysmal SAH with no associated intraparenchymal hemorrhage. Among hemorrhagic stroke in patients with COVID-19, coagulopathy was the most common etiology (73.7%); empiric anticoagulation was started in 89.5% of these patients versus 4.2% in contemporary controls (p ≤ .001) and 10.0% in historical controls (p ≤ .001). Compared to contemporary and historical controls, patients with COVID-19 had higher initial NIHSS scores, INR, PTT, and fibrinogen levels. Patients with COVID-19 also had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (84.6% vs. 4.6%, p ≤ 0.001). Sensitivity analyses excluding patients with strictly subarachnoid hemorrhage yielded similar results. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We observed an overall low rate of imaging-confirmed hemorrhagic stroke among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Most hemorrhages in patients with COVID-19 infection occurred in the setting of therapeutic anticoagulation and were associated with increased mortality. Further studies are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of therapeutic anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE:We sought to identify similarities and differences in the diagnostic requirements for ancillary testing for determination of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) around the world. METHODS:We reviewed diagnostic requirements for ancillary testing for BD/DNC in 78 unique official national BD/DNC protocols obtained from contacts worldwide between January 2018 and April 2019. RESULTS:Details provided on the performance and interpretation of ancillary tests for determination of BD/DNC were variably provided and inconsistent. Approximately half of all protocols that included each ancillary test provided details about study performance: 63% of protocols that included conventional cerebral angiography, 55% of protocols that included electroencephalography, 50% of protocols that included somatosensory evoked potentials, 48% of protocols that included transcranial Doppler ultrasonography, 43% of protocols that included nuclear medicine flow study and 41% of protocols that included brainstem auditory evoked potentials. Similarly, about half of all protocols that included each ancillary test provided details about study interpretation: 66% of protocols that included electroencephalography, 59% of protocols that included brainstem auditory evoked potentials, 56% of protocols that included somatosensory evoked potentials, 55% of protocols that included transcranial Doppler ultrasonography, 52% of protocols that included conventional cerebral angiography and 49% of protocols that included nuclear medicine flow study. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Diagnostic requirements for ancillary testing in BD/DNC determination vary around the world. We hope that the World Brain Death Project will improve worldwide consensus on the diagnostic requirements for ancillary testing in BD/DNC, both for performance and interpretation.