Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Add filters

Document Type
Clinical aspect
Year range
Interv Neuroradiol ; 27(1_suppl): 30-35, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506377


At the time of this writing, the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to be a global threat, disrupting usual processes, and protocols for delivering health care around the globe. There have been significant regional and national differences in the scope and timing of these disruptions. Many hospitals were forced to temporarily halt elective neurointerventional procedures with the first wave of the pandemic in the spring of 2020, in order to prioritize allocation of resources for acutely ill patients and also to minimize coronavirus disease 2019 transmission risks to non-acute patients, their families, and health care workers. This temporary moratorium on elective neurointerventional procedures is generally credited with helping to "flatten the curve" and direct scarce resources to more acutely ill patients; however, there have been reports of some delaying seeking medical care when it was in fact urgent, and other reports of patients having elective treatment delayed with the result of morbidity and mortality. Many regions have resumed elective neurointerventional procedures, only to now watch coronavirus disease 2019 positivity rates again climbing as winter of 2020 approaches. A new wave is now forecast which may have larger volumes of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients than the earlier wave(s) and may also coincide with a wave of patients hospitalized with seasonal influenza. This paper discusses relevant and practical elements of cessation and safe resumption of nonemergent neurointerventional services in the setting of a pandemic.

COVID-19 , Pandemics , Delivery of Health Care , Elective Surgical Procedures , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
Neuroradiol J ; : 19714009211034829, 2021 Aug 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1358989


The simultaneous growth of robotic-assisted surgery and telemedicine in recent years has only been accelerated by the recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Robotic assistance for neurovascular intervention has garnered significant interest due to opportunities for tele-stroke models of care for remote underserved areas. Lessons learned from medical robots in interventional cardiology and neurosurgery have contributed to incremental but vital advances in medical robotics despite important limitations. In this article, we discuss robot types and their clinical justification and ethics, as well as a general overview on available robots in thoracic/abdominal surgery, neurosurgery, and cardiac electrophysiology. We conclude with current clinical research in neuroendovascular intervention and a perspective on future directions.

J Neurosurg Spine ; : 1-9, 2020 Oct 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1016048


OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, quaternary-care facilities continue to provide care for patients in need of urgent and emergent invasive procedures. Perioperative protocols are needed to streamline care for these patients notwithstanding capacity and resource constraints. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel was assembled at the University of California, San Francisco, with 26 leaders across 10 academic departments, including 7 department chairpersons, the chief medical officer, the chief operating officer, infection control officers, nursing leaders, and resident house staff champions. An epidemiologist, an ethicist, and a statistician were also consulted. A modified two-round, blinded Delphi method based on 18 agree/disagree statements was used to build consensus. Significant disagreement for each statement was tested using a one-sided exact binomial test against an expected outcome of 95% consensus using a significance threshold of p < 0.05. Final triage protocols were developed with unblinded group-level discussion. RESULTS: Overall, 15 of 18 statements achieved consensus in the first round of the Delphi method; the 3 statements with significant disagreement (p < 0.01) were modified and iteratively resubmitted to the expert panel to achieve consensus. Consensus-based protocols were developed using unblinded multidisciplinary panel discussions. The final algorithms 1) quantified outbreak level, 2) triaged patients based on acuity, 3) provided a checklist for urgent/emergent invasive procedures, and 4) created a novel scoring system for the allocation of personal protective equipment. In particular, the authors modified the American College of Surgeons three-tiered triage system to incorporate more urgent cases, as are often encountered in neurosurgery and spine surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent and emergent invasive procedures need to be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The consensus-based protocols in this study may assist healthcare providers to optimize perioperative care during the pandemic.