Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:There is significant heterogeneity related to the use of prophylactic antiseizure medications (ASM) following supratentorial craniotomy. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing ASM primary prophylaxis in adults hospitalized following supratentorial neurosurgery with no prior seizure history. The following population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) questions were assessed: (1) Should ASM versus no ASM be used as seizure prophylaxis in adult patients undergoing supratentorial neurosurgery? (2) If an ASM is used, should levetiracetam (LEV) or phenytoin/fosphenytoin (PHT) be preferentially used? and (3) Should a long (> 7 days) versus short (≤ 7 days) duration of prophylaxis be used? The main outcomes were early seizure (≤ 14 days), late seizures (> 14 days), adverse events, mortality, and functional and cognitive outcomes. We utilized Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to generate recommendations. RESULTS:The initial literature search yielded 1988 articles, and 16 formed the basis of the recommendations. PICO 1: while meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated a significant benefit for early seizure prevention, meta-analyses including all study designs was nonsignificant. Further, there were no differences in late seizure or mortality rates, and there was a trend toward higher adverse event rates with ASM. PICO 2: LEV was associated with significantly lower early seizure rates than PHT, and there were trends toward fewer late seizures and adverse events with LEV. PICO 3: only three studies examined the duration of ASM treatment, and there was no significant difference in seizure events between subjects treated for a short versus long duration. CONCLUSIONS:We suggest that either prophylactic ASM or no ASM be used for seizure prophylaxis in patients undergoing supratentorial neurosurgery (conditional recommendation, low quality of evidence). If an ASM is used, we suggest LEV over PHT (conditional recommendation, very low quality of evidence) for a short duration (conditional recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

The frequency and nature of neurological exams (neuro-checks) in patients with severe acquired brain injury resulting in coma or disorders of consciousness (DoC) remain variable, with limited evidence guiding practice and poor understanding of their role in predicting and preventing neurological deterioration, functional recovery and adverse effects such as delirium. This scoping review aims to explore the frequency of bedside neurological exams within the first 7 days of injury impact on clinical outcomes in adult patients with severe acquired brain injury including mortality, neurological deterioration, long-term function, and delirium. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, CINAHL, Medline and EMBASE databases from 2003 to 2023. Search terms captured a range of acute brain injuries and neuro-assessment tools. Eligible studies included adult patients with severe traumatic or non-traumatic brain injury or stroke that addressed frequency of bedside neurological exams within the first 7 days of admission. RESULTS: Of 1327 studies screened, 20 met inclusion criteria, representing over 16,000 patients across 14 countries. Assessment tools varied, but use of the Glasgow Coma Scale was prevalent. Frequency of neuro-checks ranged from hourly to daily. Multiple outcome measures were utilized. Some studies found that continuing hourly neuro-checks beyond the first 48 hours did not provide additional clinical benefit. Others associated excessive assessment with increased stress or delirium. CONCLUSION: There is very low evidence supporting an association between the frequency of neuro-checks and functional outcomes, mortality, length of stay, or delirium. Although early assessments may aid prognostication, excessive exams may not improve outcomes and may contribute to harm. The heterogeneity, lack of evidence, and limited standardization of neuro-check frequency highlight the need for clinical research to guide future practice.

OBJECTIVE:Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) may be limited to the extracranial extradural space or extend to the intradural space. Intradural extension can potentially increase the risk of stroke and subarachnoid hemorrhage. However, the factors associated with intradural extension and its impact on clinical outcome remain unclear. METHODS:This was a secondary analysis of the STOP-CAD observational, multi-center study. Patients with CeAD and intradural extension (CeADid) were compared with those with pure CeAD extradural dissections (CeADed) using multiple regression analyses. RESULTS:Of 4,023 patients with CeAD, 534 (13.3%) had CeADid. In comparison to patients with CeADed, those with CeADid more often had clinical overt stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) at presentation, acute infarcts on imaging, a vertebral artery affected, and severe stenosis of the involved vessel (p < 0.001 for all). In contrast, carotid involvement and complete occlusions were more frequent in patients with CeADed (p < 0.001 for both). CeADid was associated with a shift in the distribution of scores on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) toward worse functional outcome (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.62-0.92) but the odds for favorable outcomes (mRS = 0-2) did not differ between the groups after appropriate adjustments on multivariate analysis. CeADid was independently associated with higher mortality at 180 days on multivariate analysis (adjusted OR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.50-5.38). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:CeADid is associated with more severe clinical presentation, a shift toward less favorable outcomes, and higher mortality rates. These findings suggest that CeADid may represent a high-risk type of CeAD. ANN NEUROL 2026.

Head computed tomography (CT) imaging is a widely used imaging modality with multitudes of medical indications, particularly in assessing pathology of the brain, skull and cerebrovascular system. It is commonly used as the first-line imaging in neurologic emergencies given its rapidity of image acquisition, safety, cost and ubiquity. Deep learning models may facilitate detection of a wide range of diseases. However, the scarcity of high-quality labels and annotations, particularly among less common conditions, substantially hinders the development of powerful models. To address this challenge, we introduce FM-HCT, a Foundation Model for Head CT for generalizable disease detection, trained using self-supervised learning. Our approach pretrains a deep learning model on a large, diverse dataset of 361,663 non-contrast 3D head CT scans without the need for manual annotations, enabling the model to learn robust, generalizable features. Our results demonstrate that the self-supervised foundation model substantially improves performance on downstream diagnostic tasks compared to models trained from scratch and previous 3D CT foundation models trained on scarce annotated datasets.

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear, particularly for Omicron subvariants. We evaluate vaccine effectiveness against reinfection with Omicron BA.1/BA.2, BA.4/BA.5, XBB, and later subvariants among 5- to 17-year-olds using data from the RECOVER initiative, a national electronic health record database covering 37 U.S. children's hospitals and health institutions. We emulate target trials by age group and variant period, comparing previously infected participants between January 2022 and August 2023. During the BA.1/BA.2 period, vaccination reduces the risk of reinfection, with effectiveness rates of 62% in children and 65% in adolescents. During the BA.4/BA.5 period, protection effectiveness in children was 57%, whereas no statistically significant protection is observed in adolescents. During the XBB and later period, no significant protection is observed in either group. In summary, COVID-19 vaccination provides protection against reinfection during the early and mid-Omicron periods in previously infected pediatric populations, but effectiveness declines for later variants.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The Curing Coma Campaign Ethics Working Group sought to understand informed consent practices for research involving persons with disorders of consciousness (DoC) to establish an empirical foundation to formulate common consent elements for research regarding this vulnerable population. METHODS:Consent forms for research involving persons with DoC were collected from the Curing Coma Campaign members and Clinicaltrials.gov in the fall of 2024. We abstracted data about study specifics, the consent process, and unique considerations related to persons with DoC and then reviewed and collated them using descriptive statistics. RESULTS:The collection process yielded 58 consent forms: 40 (69%) from member submissions and 18 (31%) from Clinicaltrials.gov. After excluding duplicates and studies that did not pertain to persons with DoC, there were 43 forms, which included 62 unique terms to describe acute brain injury/consciousness/DoC. Of 41 studies that enrolled persons with DoC, there were 4 (10%) that mentioned an evaluation for covert consciousness. Although only 3 (7%) forms mentioned an evaluation for capacity of the person with DoC/recovered from DoC, 16 (39%) referenced first-person consent if the person with DoC regained capacity. Most studies that involved study-specific medications/interventions/tests included some mention of experiential risks (26/32, 81%), but only 2 (6%) specifically addressed the challenges associated with these risks in a person with DoC. CONCLUSIONS:Consent forms for research involving persons with DoC include inconsistent terminology to describe acute brain injury/consciousness/DoC, the capacity to consent, and the potential experiential risks of study participation in the context of a DoC. There are opportunities to improve transparency and consistency of communication about research involving persons with DoC via creation of common consent elements to ensure the informed consent process protects individual autonomy.

BACKGROUND:Many survivors of hemorrhagic stroke have impaired communication. We aimed to identify preadmission, admission, and post-discharge factors associated with self-reported impaired communication after hemorrhagic stroke. DESIGN/METHODS:Patients with intracerebral or subarachnoid hemorrhage (ICH or SAH) admitted at an urban academic medical center were assessed 3-months post-bleed using the communication Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QoL) short form inventory. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between impaired communication (Neuro-QoL scaled score < 100) and preadmission, admission, and post-discharge factors. RESULTS:Of 108 patients (68 ICH and 40 SAH), 59 (54.6%) had impaired communication 3-months post-bleed. On multivariate analysis of the full cohort, when controlling for NIHSS score on admission, impaired communication was associated with: retirement prior to admission (OR: 8.18, 95% CI 1.95-40.5, p = 0.005), hospital length-of-stay (OR: 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.22, p = 0.012), and cognitive impairment post-bleed (OR: 32.1, 95% CI 8.93-146, p < 0.001). There were 43 (63.2%) ICH patients with impaired communication 3-months post-bleed. On multivariate analysis, impaired communication was associated with: retirement prior to admission (OR: 9.46, 95% CI 1.76-71.8, p = 0.014), supratentorial location (OR: 8.93, 95% CI 1.22-93.6, p = 0.043), hospital length-of-stay (OR: 1.21, 95% CI 1.01-1.45, p = 0.018), and cognitive impairment post-bleed (OR: 16.3, 95% CI 3.58-102, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Impaired communication after hemorrhagic stroke is more common in patients who were retired prior to admission and who have post-bleed comorbid cognitive impairment. Increased surveillance is recommended for retired and cognitively impaired patients. Additional investigation into the relationship between communication and both retirement status and cognitive impairment is needed.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is an important cause of ischemic stroke in young adults. Nearly 100 million annual chiropractic cervical manipulations are performed in the United States. The relationship between manipulation and CeAD remains controversial. METHODS:We analyzed patients in the multicenter STOP-CAD registry (n=4023) to identify CeAD cases diagnosed after chiropractic cervical manipulation. Demographics and clinical features were compared between manipulation-associated and nonmanipulation-associated cases using χ2 and t tests. Multivariable logistic regression identified key factors associated with manipulation-related CeAD. RESULTS:About 1 in 20 CeAD cases in this registry reported antecedent cervical manipulation. In multivariable binary logistic regression, compared with patients without prior manipulation, those with prior manipulation were younger (OR per year 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-0.99, P=0.014), more often female (OR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.21-2.23, P=0.001), less often diabetic (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.78, P=0.018), presented with neck pain (OR: 2.80, 95% CI: 2.08-3.77, P<0.001), and had higher odds of isolated vertebral artery dissection (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.57-2.94, P<0.001). Recurrent ischemic stroke rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Given the very high number of manipulations performed annually, the absolute risk of secondary CeAD is extremely low. Manipulation-associated cases have distinct clinical features, occurring more often in younger women with vertebral dissections. Whether manipulation acts as a precipitating trigger or patients with early CeAD symptoms seek manipulation remains unresolved.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The aim of this study was to assess the limitations of a traditional twice-daily lecture format and evaluate the feasibility and impact of implementing an academic half-day (AHD) for neurology residents at a multisite academic institution. AHD has the potential to improve attendance, satisfaction, and clinical competency compared with traditional didactics in graduate medical education. However, its feasibility and impact within neurology residency programs remain underexplored, with few adopting this model to date. Coverage logistics, faculty availability, and neurologic emergencies continue to pose challenges, particularly in large, multisite institutions. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A needs assessment survey was administered to 36 neurology residents (postgraduate year [PGY]2-PGY4) in spring 2024 to evaluate attendance, satisfaction, and suggestions for improvement. Attendance was recorded over 1 month (August 2024). Based on survey feedback, a new 3.5-hour AHD curriculum was developed collaboratively by residents and faculty, held Tuesday mornings every week with varied lecture formats. One resident per class covered urgent clinical duties at each of 3 sites, while faculty and advanced practice providers (APPs) independently conducted rounds. Attendance was recorded for one month after implementation (September 2024), and surveys were distributed to assess satisfaction with both the curriculum and the coverage model. Residency In-Training Examination (RITE) scores were compared between the 2022 and 2024 cohorts (before AHD) and the 2025 cohort (after AHD implementation). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= 0.0013). Faculty and APPs reported positive or neutral effects on workflow (82.6% and 100%, respectively) and patient safety (95.6% and 100%, respectively). DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:Implementation of AHD across a large, multisite neurology residency program was feasible and associated with higher attendance, improved resident satisfaction, and enhanced RITE performance, without adverse effects on workflow or patient safety. Key factors for success included resident involvement, a targeted needs assessment, and strong coverage support from faculty and APPs.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Though brain fog is common in Long-coronavirus disease 2019 (Long-COVID), the incidence of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is unknown. METHODS:In an observational cohort study, recovered COVID-positive, Long-COVID, and COVID-negative subjects underwent blinded evaluation using National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) and National Institute on Aging (NIA) -Alzheimer's Association diagnostic criteria for dementia and MCI. The cumulative incidence of MCI was calculated for each group, and the hazard of MCI was compared between groups. RESULTS:Among 260 subjects, the cumulative incidence of MCI over 4.4 years was higher with Long-COVID (27%) versus recovered-COVID (5%) or COVID-negative status (1%). There was a higher hazard of MCI for patients with Long-COVID compared to those without (hazard ratio [HR] 3.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.86-8.31, p < 0.001), and specifically for the Alzheimer's disease (AD) -related MCI subtype (HR 3.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-9.00, p = 0.027). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:The cumulative incidence and adjusted hazard of MCI (and specifically AD-related MCI) at 4.4 years was significantly higher among Long-COVID patients compared to recovered-COVID and COVID-negative controls.