Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Cerebrovasc Dis ; 50(3): 245-261, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147303

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has placed a tremendous strain on healthcare services. This study, prepared by a large international panel of stroke experts, assesses the rapidly growing research and personal experience with COVID-19 stroke and offers recommendations for stroke management in this challenging new setting: modifications needed for prehospital emergency rescue and hyperacute care; inpatient intensive or stroke units; posthospitalization rehabilitation; follow-up including at-risk family and community; and multispecialty departmental developments in the allied professions. SUMMARY: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 uses spike proteins binding to tissue angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-2 receptors, most often through the respiratory system by virus inhalation and thence to other susceptible organ systems, leading to COVID-19. Clinicians facing the many etiologies for stroke have been sobered by the unusual incidence of combined etiologies and presentations, prominent among them are vasculitis, cardiomyopathy, hypercoagulable state, and endothelial dysfunction. International standards of acute stroke management remain in force, but COVID-19 adds the burdens of personal protections for the patient, rescue, and hospital staff and for some even into the postdischarge phase. For pending COVID-19 determination and also for those shown to be COVID-19 affected, strict infection control is needed at all times to reduce spread of infection and to protect healthcare staff, using the wealth of well-described methods. For COVID-19 patients with stroke, thrombolysis and thrombectomy should be continued, and the usual early management of hypertension applies, save that recent work suggests continuing ACE inhibitors and ARBs. Prothrombotic states, some acute and severe, encourage prophylactic LMWH unless bleeding risk is high. COVID-19-related cardiomyopathy adds risk of cardioembolic stroke, where heparin or warfarin may be preferable, with experience accumulating with DOACs. As ever, arteritis can prove a difficult diagnosis, especially if not obvious on the acute angiogram done for clot extraction. This field is under rapid development and may generate management recommendations which are as yet unsettled, even undiscovered. Beyond the acute management phase, COVID-19-related stroke also forces rehabilitation services to use protective precautions. As with all stroke patients, health workers should be aware of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, and/or distress developing in their patients and caregivers. Postdischarge outpatient care currently includes continued secondary prevention measures. Although hoping a COVID-19 stroke patient can be considered cured of the virus, those concerned for contact safety can take comfort in the increasing use of telemedicine, which is itself a growing source of patient-physician contacts. Many online resources are available to patients and physicians. Like prior challenges, stroke care teams will also overcome this one. Key Messages: Evidence-based stroke management should continue to be provided throughout the patient care journey, while strict infection control measures are enforced.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , COVID-19/complications , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Stroke/etiology , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/metabolism , Stroke/diagnosis
2.
Front Neurol ; 11: 609227, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1054991

ABSTRACT

Objective: In light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the associated hospitalization of an overwhelming number of ventilator-dependent patients, medical and/or ethical patient triage paradigms have become essential. While guidelines on the allocation of scarce resources do exist, such work within the subdisciplines of intensive care (e.g., neurocritical care) remains limited. Methods: A 16-item questionnaire was developed that sought to explore/quantify the expert opinions of German neurointensivists with regard to triage decisions. The anonymous survey was conducted via a web-based platform and in total, 96 members of the Initiative of German Neurointensive Trial Engagement (IGNITE)-study group were contacted via e-mail. The IGNITE consortium consists of an interdisciplinary panel of specialists with expertise in neuro-critical care (i.e., anesthetists, neurologists and neurosurgeons). Results: Fifty members of the IGNITE consortium responded to the questionnaire; in total the respondents were in charge of more than 500 Neuro ICU beds throughout Germany. Common determinants reported which affected triage decisions included known patient wishes (98%), the state of health before admission (96%), SOFA-score (85%) and patient age (69%). Interestingly, other principles of allocation, such as a treatment of "youngest first" (61%) and members of the healthcare sector (50%) were also noted. While these were the most accepted parameters affecting the triage of patients, a "first-come, first-served" principle appeared to be more accepted than a lottery for the allocation of ICU beds which contradicts much of what has been reported within the literature. The respondents also felt that at least one neurointensivist should serve on any interdisciplinary triage team. Conclusions: The data gathered in the context of this survey reveal the estimation/perception of triage algorithms among neurointensive care specialists facing COVID-19. Further, it is apparent that German neurointensivists strongly feel that they should be involved in any triage decisions at an institutional level given the unique resources needed to treat patients within the Neuro ICU.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL