Current trends and outcomes of non-elective neurosurgical care in Central Europe during the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Reflecting the first wave COVID-19 pandemic in Central Europe (i.e. March 16th-April 15th, 2020) the neurosurgical community witnessed a general diminution in the incidence of emergency neurosurgical cases, which was impelled by a reduced number of traumatic brain injuries (TBI), spine conditions, and chronic subdural hematomas (CSDH). This appeared to be associated with restrictions imposed on mobility within countries but also to possible delayed patient introduction and interdisciplinary medical counseling. In response to one year of COVID-19 experience, also mapping the third wave of COVID-19 in 2021 (i.e. March 16 to April 15, 2021), we aimed to reevaluate the current prevalence and outcomes for emergency non-elective neurosurgical cases in COVID-19-negative patients across Austria and the Czech Republic. The primary analysis was focused on incidence and 30-day mortality in emergency neurosurgical cases compared to four preceding years (2017-2020). A total of 5077 neurosurgical emergency cases were reviewed. The year 2021 compared to the years 2017-2019 was not significantly related to any increased odds of 30 day mortality in Austria or in the Czech Republic. Recently, there was a significant propensity toward increased incidence rates of emergency non-elective neurosurgical cases during the third COVID-19 pandemic wave in Austria, driven by their lower incidence during the first COVID-19 wave in 2020. Selected neurosurgical conditions commonly associated with traumatic etiologies including TBI, and CSDH roughly reverted to similar incidence rates from the previous non-COVID-19 years. Further resisting the major deleterious effects of the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, it is edifying to notice that the neurosurgical community´s demeanor to the recent third pandemic culmination keeps the very high standards of non-elective neurosurgical care alongside with low periprocedural morbidity. This also reflects the current state of health care quality in the Czech Republic and Austria.

Trends and outcomes for non-elective neurosurgical procedures in Central Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The world currently faces the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. Little is known about the effects of a pandemic on non-elective neurosurgical practices, which have continued under modified conditions to reduce the spread of COVID-19. This knowledge might be critical for the ongoing second coronavirus wave and potential restrictions on health care. We aimed to determine the incidence and 30-day mortality rate of various non-elective neurosurgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective, multi-centre observational cohort study among neurosurgical centres within Austria, the Czech Republic, and Switzerland was performed. Incidence of neurosurgical emergencies and related 30-day mortality rates were determined for a period reflecting the peak pandemic of the first wave in all participating countries (i.e. March 16th-April 15th, 2020), and compared to the same period in prior years (2017, 2018, and 2019). A total of 4,752 emergency neurosurgical cases were reviewed over a 4-year period. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a general decline in the incidence of non-elective neurosurgical cases, which was driven by a reduced number of traumatic brain injuries, spine conditions, and chronic subdural hematomas. Thirty-day mortality did not significantly increase overall or for any of the conditions examined during the peak of the pandemic. The neurosurgical community in these three European countries observed a decrease in the incidence of some neurosurgical emergencies with 30-day mortality rates comparable to previous years (2017-2019). Lower incidence of neurosurgical cases is likely related to restrictions placed on mobility within countries, but may also involve delayed patient presentation.

Automatic real-time analysis and interpretation of arterial blood gas sample for Point-of-care testing: Clinical validation.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care arterial blood gas (ABG) is a blood measurement test and a useful diagnostic tool that assists with treatment and therefore improves clinical outcomes. However, numerically reported test results make rapid interpretation difficult or open to interpretation. The arterial blood gas algorithm (ABG-a) is a new digital diagnostics solution that can provide clinicians with real-time interpretation of preliminary data on safety features, oxygenation, acid-base disturbances and renal profile. The main aim of this study was to clinically validate the algorithm against senior experienced clinicians, for acid-base interpretation, in a clinical context. METHODS: We conducted a prospective international multicentre observational cross-sectional study. 346 sample sets and 64 inpatients eligible for ABG met strict sampling criteria. Agreement was evaluated using Cohen's kappa index, diagnostic accuracy was evaluated with sensitivity, specificity, efficiency or global accuracy and positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) for the prevalence in the study population. RESULTS: The concordance rates between the interpretations of the clinicians and the ABG-a for acid-base disorders were an observed global agreement of 84,3% with a Cohen's kappa coefficient 0.81; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.86; p < 0.001. For detecting accuracy normal acid-base status the algorithm has a sensitivity of 90.0% (95% CI 79.9 to 95.3), a specificity 97.2% (95% CI 94.5 to 98.6) and a global accuracy of 95.9% (95% CI 93.3 to 97.6). For the four simple acid-base disorders, respiratory alkalosis: sensitivity of 91.2 (77.0 to 97.0), a specificity 100.0 (98.8 to 100.0) and global accuracy of 99.1 (97.5 to 99.7); respiratory acidosis: sensitivity of 61.1 (38.6 to 79.7), a specificity of 100.0 (98.8 to 100.0) and global accuracy of 98.0 (95.9 to 99.0); metabolic acidosis: sensitivity of 75.8 (59.0 to 87.2), a specificity of 99.7 (98.2 to 99.9) and a global accuracy of 97.4 (95.1 to 98.6); metabolic alkalosis sensitivity of 72.2 (56.0 to 84.2), a specificity of 95.5 (92.5 to 97.3) and a global accuracy of 93.0 (88.8 to 95.3); the four complex acid-base disorders, respiratory and metabolic alkalosis, respiratory and metabolic acidosis, respiratory alkalosis and metabolic acidosis, respiratory acidosis and metabolic alkalosis, the sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy was also high. For normal acid-base status the algorithm has PPV 87.1 (95% CI 76.6 to 93.3) %, and NPV 97.9 (95% CI 95.4 to 99.0) for a prevalence of 17.4 (95% CI 13.8 to 21.8). For the four-simple acid-base disorders and the four complex acid-base disorders the PPV and NPV were also statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The ABG-a showed very high agreement and diagnostic accuracy with experienced senior clinicians in the acid-base disorders in a clinical context. The method also provides refinement and deep complex analysis at the point-of-care that a clinician could have at the bedside on a day-to-day basis. The ABG-a method could also have the potential to reduce human errors by checking for imminent life-threatening situations, analysing the internal consistency of the results, the oxygenation and renal status of the patient.