Faculty Bibliography

[Figure: see text].

Importance/UNASSIGNED:In patients with acute spontaneous or traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, early hemostasis is thought to be critical to minimize ongoing bleeding. However, research evaluating hemostatic therapies has been hampered by a lack of standardized clinical trial outcome measures. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To identify appropriate primary outcomes for phase 2 and 3 clinical trials of therapies aimed at reducing acute intracranial bleeding. Evidence Review/UNASSIGNED:A comprehensive review of all previous clinical trials of hemostatic therapy for intracranial bleeding was performed, and studies measuring the frequency, risk factors, and association of intracranial bleeding with outcome of hemorrhage growth were included. Findings/UNASSIGNED:A hierarchy of 3 outcome measures is recommended, with the first choice being a global patient-centered clinical outcome scale measured 30 to 180 days after the event; the second, a combined clinical and radiographic end point associating hemorrhage expansion with a poor patient-centered outcome at 24 hours or later; and the third, a radiographic measure of hemorrhage expansion at 24 hours alone. Additional recommendations stress the importance of separating various subtypes of bleeding when possible, early treatment within a standardized treatment window, and the routine use of computerized planimetry comparing continuous measures of absolute and relative hemorrhage growth as either a primary or secondary end point. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:Standardization of outcome measures in studies of intracranial bleeding and hemostatic therapy will support comparative effectiveness research and meta-analysis, with the goal of accelerating the translation of research into clinical practice. The 3 outcome measures proposed in this consensus statement could help this process.

Background/Objectives/UNASSIGNED:Little is known regarding the prevalence and predictors of prolonged cognitive and psychological symptoms of COVID-19 among community-dwellers. We aimed to quantitatively measure self-reported metrics of fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, anxiety, depression, and sleep and identify factors associated with these metrics among United States residents with or without COVID-19. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We solicited 1000 adult United States residents for an online survey conducted February 3-5, 2021 utilizing a commercial crowdsourcing community research platform. The platform curates eligible participants to approximate United States demographics by age, sex, and race proportions. COVID-19 was diagnosed by laboratory testing and/or by exposure to a known positive contact with subsequent typical symptoms. Prolonged COVID-19 was self-reported and coded for those with symptoms ≥ 1 month following initial diagnosis. The primary outcomes were NIH PROMIS/Neuro-QoL short-form T-scores for fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, anxiety, depression, and sleep compared among those with prolonged COVID-19 symptoms, COVID-19 without prolonged symptoms and COVID-19 negative subjects. Multivariable backwards step-wise logistic regression models were constructed to predict abnormal Neuro-QoL metrics. Results/UNASSIGNED:= 0.047), but there were no significant differences in quantitative measures of anxiety, depression, fatigue, or sleep. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Prolonged symptoms occurred in 25% of COVID-19 positive participants, and NeuroQoL cognitive dysfunction scores were significantly worse among COVID-19 positive subjects, even after accounting for demographic and stressor covariates. Fatigue, anxiety, depression, and sleep scores did not differ between COVID-19 positive and negative respondents.

OBJECTIVE:We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function due to COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion. METHODS:We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase to identify publications that described at least one patient with COVID-19 who had altered olfactory/gustatory function and had CSF testing performed. The search ranged from December 1, 2019 to November 18, 2020. RESULTS:We identified 51 publications that described 70 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of 51 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing, 3 (6%) patients had positive results and 1 (2%) patient had indeterminate results. Cycle threshold (Ct; the number of amplification cycles required for the target gene to exceed the threshold, which is inversely related to viral load) was not provided for the patients with a positive PCR. The patient with indeterminate results had a Ct of 37 initially, then no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on repeat testing. Of 6 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, 3 (50%) were positive. Testing to distinguish intrathecal antibody synthesis from transudation of antibodies to the CSF via breakdown of the blood-brain barrier was performed in 1/3 (33%) patients; this demonstrated antibody transmission to the CSF via transudation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function. While pathology studies are needed, our review suggests it is unlikely that these symptoms are related to viral neuroinvasion.

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial proportion of COVID-19 patients had documented thrombotic complications and ischemic stroke. Several mechanisms related to immune mediated thrombosis, the renin angiotensin system, and the effect of SARS-CoV-2 in cardiac and brain tissue may contribute to the pathogenesis of ischemic stroke in patients with COVID-19. Simultaneously, significant strains on global healthcare delivery, including ischemic stroke management, have made treatment of stroke in the setting of COVID-19 particularly challenging. In this review we summarize the current knowledge on epidemiology, clinical manifestation and pathophysiology of ischemic stroke in patients with COVID-19 to bridge the gap from bench to bedside and clinical practice during the most challenging global health crisis of the last decades.

We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) studies in patients who had a seizure in the setting of COVID-19 infection to evaluate for evidence of viral neuroinvasion. We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase to identify publications that reported one or more patients with COVID-19 who had a seizure and had CSF testing preformed. The search ranged from December 1st 2019 to November 18th 2020. We identified 56 publications which described 69 unique patients who met our inclusion criteria. Of the 54 patients whose past medical history was provided, 2 (4%) had epilepsy and 1 (2%) had a prior seizure in the setting of hyperglycemia, but the remaining 51 (94%) had no history of seizures. Seizure was the initial symptom of COVID-19 for 15 (22%) patients. There were 26 (40%) patients who developed status epilepticus. SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing was performed in the CSF for 45 patients; 6 (13%) had a positive CSF SARS-CoV-2 PCR, only 1 (17%) of whom had status epilepticus. The cycle thresholds were not reported. Evaluation for CSF SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (directly or indirectly, via testing for CSF oligoclonal bands or immunoglobulins) was performed in 26 patients, only 2 (8%) of whom had evidence of intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of the 11 patients who had CSF autoimmune antibody panels tested, 1 had NMDA antibodies and 1 had Caspr-2 antibodies. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the CSF of patients with seizures who have COVID-19 is uncommon. Our review suggests that seizures in this patient population are not likely due to direct viral invasion of the brain.