ABSTRACT
Introduction/Aims: Studies conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have reported varied data regarding the incidence of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS). The present study investigated demographic and clinical features, management, and outcomes of patients with GBS during a specified period of the COVID-19 pandemic, and compared these features to those of GBS in the previous year. Methods: A multicenter, ambispective cohort study including 26 centers across India was conducted. Data from a pre-COVID-19 period (March 1 to August 31, 2019) were collected retrospectively and collected ambispectively for a specified COVID-19 period (March 1 to August 31, 2020). The study was registered with the Clinical Trial Registry India (CTRI/2020/11/029143). Results: Data from 555 patients were included for analysis: pre-COVID-19 (n = 334) and COVID-19 (n = 221). Males were more commonly affected during both periods (male:female, 2:1). Gastroenteritis was the most frequent antecedent event in 2019 (17.4%), whereas fever was the most common event in 2020 (10.7%). Paraparesis (21.3% versus [vs.] 9.3%, P = 0.001) and sensory involvement (51.1% vs. 41.3%; P = 0.023) were more common during COVID-19 in 2020, whereas back pain (26.3% vs. 18.4%; P = 0.032) and bowel symptoms (20.7% vs. 13.7%; P = 0.024) were more frequent in the pre-COVID period. There was no difference in clinical outcomes between the two groups in terms of GBS disability score at discharge and 3 months after discharge. Independent predictors of disability in the pre-COVID period included areflexia/hyporeflexia, the requirementfor intubation, and time to bulbar weakness; in the COVID-19 period, independent predictors included time from onset to admission, intubation, and intubation requirement. The mortality rate was 2.3% during the entire study period (13/555 cases). Discussion: Results of this study revealed an overall reduction in the frequency of GBS during the pandemic. The lockdown likely reduced the risk for antecedent infections due to social distancing and improved hygiene, which may have resulted in the reduction of the frequency of GBS.
ABSTRACT
Background and objective Amongst the varied neurological manifestations of COVID-19 infection, stroke is one of the common complications. A large portion of patients had large vessel occlusion (LVO) which increases the risk of malignant cerebral infarction requiring decompressive craniectomy. The impact of COVID-19, however, on decompressive craniectomy is not well described. Through this study, we aim to study the impact of decompressive craniectomy in COVID-19 patients presented to our tertiary care hospital. Material and methods Data of all acute ischemic stroke patients who tested COVID positive during the study period was collected. From among them, patients requiring decompressive craniectomy were included. The demographic, clinico-radiological parameters related to stroke, treatment received, outcome and complications were noted. In addition, data from all case reports and case series published on patients with COVID-19, who had developed ischemic stroke and underwent decompression craniectomy was collected and systematically reviewed. Results Twenty-seven stroke patients tested positive for COVID-19 infection, out of whom five patients underwent decompression hemicraniectomy in view of neurologic deterioration. The review of literature yielded 453 s. After reading the full text of 69 articles, 12 studies on 15 patients finally met our inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. The mortality rate was 40% among stroke patients requiring decompressive craniectomy in COVID-19 patients. The mortality rate and functional outcomes of this cohort are comparable to the pre-pandemic period. Conclusion Decompressive craniectomy is a life-saving procedure in COVID-19 patients with malignant infarctions similar to patients in the pre-COVID-19 era.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Neurological emergencies saw a paradigm shift in approach during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the challenge to manage patients with and without COVID-19. We aimed to compare the various neurological disorders and 3 months outcome in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: In an ambispective cohort study design, we enrolled patients with and without SARS CoV-2 infection coming to a medical emergency with neurological disorders between April 2020 and September 2020. Demographic, clinical, biochemical, and treatment details of these patients were collected and compared. Their outcomes, both in-hospital and at 3 months were assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Two thirty-five patients (235) were enrolled from emergency services with neurological disorders. Of them, 81 (34.5%) were COVID-19 positive. The mean (SD) age was 49.5 (17.3) years, and the majority of the patients were male (63.0%). The commonest neurological diagnosis was acute ischemic stroke (AIS) (43.0%). The in-hospital mortality was higher in the patients who were COVID-19 positive (COVID-19 positive: 29 (35.8%) versus COVID-19 negative: 12 (7.8%), P value: <0.001). The 3 months telephonic follow-up could be completed in 73.2% of the patients (142/194). Four (12.1%) deaths occurred on follow-up in the COVID-19 positive versus fifteen (13.8%) in the COVID-19 negative patients (P value: 1.00). The 3-month mRS was worse in the COVID-19 positive group (P value <0.001). However, this was driven by higher in-hospital morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 positive patients. Conclusion: Patients with neurological disorders presenting with COVID-19 infection had worse outcomes, including in-hospital and 3 months disability.
ABSTRACT
Background: Governments have imposed lockdowns in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have restricted outpatient clinics and elective services meant for non-COVID illnesses. This has led to patients facing unprecedented challenges and uncertainties. This study was carried out to assess patients' concerns and apprehensions about the effect of the lockdown on their treatments. Materials and Methods: An ambispective, observational cross-sectional single centre study was conducted. Patients were contacted telephonically and requested to answer a structured questionnaire. Their responses were documented and summarized as frequency and proportions. Results: A total of 727 patients were interviewed. Epilepsy (32%) was the most common neurological illness in our cohort followed by stroke (18%). About half the patients and/or their caregivers reported health-related concerns during the lockdown. The primary concern was how to connect with their treating neurologist if need arose. Forty-seven patients (6.4%) had drug default. Among patients on immunomodulatory treatments, only eight patients had drug default. High compliance rates were also observed in the stroke and epilepsy cohorts. Of the 71 patients who required emergency care during the lockdown, 24 could reach our hospital emergency. Fourteen patients either had a delay or could not seek emergency care. Two-thirds of our patients found the telemedicine experience satisfactory. Conclusion: The ongoing pandemic will continue to pose challenges to both physicians and patients. Patients in follow-up may need to be contacted regularly and counselled regarding the importance of maintaining drug compliance. Telemedicine can be used to strengthen the healthcare delivery to patients with non-COVID illnesses.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To study impact of COVID-19 pandemic on frequency, clinical/electrophysiological profile and treatment outcomes in pediatric Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Background: GBS is the most frequent cause of pediatric acute flaccid paralysis. The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric GBS is unclear in the literature. Methods: We conducted an ambispective, multicentric, cohort study involving 12 of 27 centres in GBS Consortium, during two periods: pre-COVID-19 (March-August 2019) and during COVID-19 (March-August 2020). Children ≤12 years who satisfied National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke criteria for GBS/variants were enrolled. Details pertaining to clinical/laboratory parameters, treatment and outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge, GBS Disability score at discharge and 3 months) were analysed. Results: We enrolled 33 children in 2019 and 10 in 2020. Children in 2020 were older (median 10.4 [interquartile range 6.75-11.25] years versus 5 (2.5-8.4) years; P = 0.022) and had more sensory symptoms (50% versus 18.2%; P = 0.043). The 2020 group had relatively favourable mRS at discharge (median 1 (1-3.5) versus 3 (2-4); P = 0.042) and GBS disability score at 3 months (median 0 (0-0.75) versus 2 (0-3); P = 0.009) compared to 2019. Multivariate analysis revealed bowel involvement (P = 0.000) and ventilatory support (P = 0.001) as independent predictors of disability. No child in 2020 had preceding/concurrent SARS-CoV2 infection. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a marked decline in pediatric GBS presenting to hospitals. Antecedent illnesses, clinical and electrophysiological profile of GBS remained largely unchanged from the pre-pandemic era.
ABSTRACT
The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated a global health crisis. Non-COVID diseases across specialties have been significantly compromised. The greatest challenge has been to continue providing care to non-COVID cases with minimum transmission risk to health care workers, patients, and caregivers. In this specter, better described as a medical holocaust, we present our experiences of dealing with acute neurological patients who could access our facility. We attempted to work on three key areas - initial screening using a more inclusive, dynamic checklist for COVID suspicion over and above the emergency triage, a mandatory initial holding on a separate floor of our inpatient service equipped with infection control strategies similar to a COVID-designated area, and daily screening of health care workers and caregivers for symptoms and possible exposures. It was a steep learning curve, a couple of close shaves, and many more lessons that went into the development of an algorithm that seems to be working well.