Outcomes in patients with large vessel occlusion strokes undergoing mechanical thrombectomy with concurrent COVID-19: a nationwide retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary studies show that patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) acute ischemic strokes have worse outcomes with concurrent COVID-19 infection. We investigated the outcomes for patients with LVO strokes undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with concurrent COVID-19 infection. METHODS: The National Inpatient Database (NIS) was used for our analysis. Patients in the year 2020 with an ICD-10 diagnosis code for acute ischemic stroke and procedural code for MT were included with and without COVID-19. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using a logistic regression model with age, sex, stroke location, Elixhauser comorbidity score, and other patient variables deemed clinically relevant as covariates. RESULTS: Patients in the COVID-19 group were younger (64.3±14.4 vs 69.4±14.5 years, P<0.001), had a higher rate of inpatient mortality (22.4% vs 10.1%, P<0.001), and a longer length of stay (10 vs 6 days, P<0.001). Patients with COVID-19 had higher odds of death (OR 2.78, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.65) and lower odds of a routine discharge (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.89). There was no difference in the odds of subsequent stroke and cerebral hemorrhage, but patients with COVID-19 had statistically significantly higher odds of respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, and sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with LVOs undergoing MT within the 2020 NIS database had worse outcomes when co-diagnosed with COVID-19, likely due to non-neurological manifestations of COVID-19.

The Focused Neurosurgical Examination During Telehealth Visits: Guidelines During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond.

OBJECTIVE:  To provide guidelines to healthcare workers for performing a focused neurological examination via telemedicine during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-2019) pandemic. METHODS:  We reviewed our department's outpatient clinic visits after the implementation of a telemedicine protocol in response to the COVID-19 crisis. Crossover rates from telehealth to in-person visits were evaluated and guidelines for performing a telemedicine neurological exam were created based on the consensus of 16 neurosurgical attending providers over a four-month period. RESULTS:  From March 23, 2020 to July 20, 2020, some 2157 telehealth visits were performed in our department. Some 26 were converted to in-person visits by the provider request with the most cited reason for conversion being the need for a more detailed patient evaluation. Based on these experiences, we created a graphical tutorial to address the key components of the neurological exam with adaptations specific to the telehealth visit. CONCLUSIONS:  In response to the global coronavirus pandemic, telemedicine has become an integral part of neurosurgeons' daily practice. Telemedicine failures remain low but primarily occur due to a need for more comprehensive evaluations. We provide guidelines for the neurosurgical exam during telehealth visits in an effort to assuage some of these issues.

Neuro-oncology practice guidelines from a high-volume surgeon at the COVID-19 epicenter.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, physicians have begun adapting their daily practices to prevent transmissions. In this study we aimed to provide surgical neuro-oncologists with practice guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic based on objective data from a high-volume brain tumor surgeon at the current COVID-19 epicenter. METHODS: All outpatient visits and surgeries performed by the senior author during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared between the initial quarantine (3/23/20-5/4/20), the plateau period following quarantine (5/5/20-6/27/20), and the second peak (6/28/20-7/20/20). In-person and telemedicine visits were evaluated for crossovers. Surgeries were subdivided based on lesion type and evaluated across the same time period. RESULTS: From 3/23/20-7/20/20, 469 clinic visits and 196 surgeries were identified. After quarantine was lifted, face-to-face visits increased (P < 0.01) yet no change in telehealth visits occurred. Of 327 telehealth visits, only 5.8% converted to in-person during the 4-month period with the most cited reason being patient preference (68.4%). Of the 196 surgeries performed during the pandemic, 29.1% occurred during quarantine, 49.0% during the plateau, and 21.9% occurred in the second peak. No COVID negative patients developed symptoms at follow-up. 55.6% were performed on malignant tumors and 31.6% were benign with no difference in case volumes throughout the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Despite exceptional challenges, we have maintained a high-volume surgical neuro-oncology practice at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. We provide the protocols implemented at our institution in order to maximize neuro-oncology care while mitigating risk of COVID-19 exposure to both patients and providers.

Early Changes to Neurosurgery Resident Training During the COVID-19 Pandemic at a Large U.S. Academic Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to sweeping changes in residency programs across the world, including cancellation of elective cases. The effects of safety measures on neurosurgical training remain unclear. To understand how neurosurgical residents have been affected, we analyzed the operative experience in the months leading up to and during the pandemic. METHODS: The resident and institutional case totals were tallied for a single residency program in Miami-Dade County from January 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020. A matched cohort analysis was performed before and during the pandemic to assess the effects on resident surgical training. RESULTS: The case totals for all levels of training were lower when restrictions were placed on elective surgeries. An average of 11 cases was logged in April 2020, a decrease from 26 cases in April 2019 (95% confidence interval, 8.7-22; P < 0.01). An average of 20 cases was logged in May 2020, a decrease from 25 cases in May 2019 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-8.8; P = 0.01). In April and May 2020, 299 (66%) and 148 (50%) fewer cases had been performed at our institution compared with April and May 2109. CONCLUSIONS: Operative experience was reduced for residents during the months when the performance of elective cases was restricted. Our data suggest experience in some areas of neurosurgery were more affected than were others, and residents at different levels of training were also affected differently. However, the extent of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on neurosurgical training is unlikely to be understood in the short term.