Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 13(4): 304-307, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1013062

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has affected stroke care globally. In this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of the current pandemic on racial disparities among stroke patients receiving mechanical thrombectomy (MT). METHODS: We used the prospectively collected data in the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry from 12 thrombectomy-capable stroke centers in the US and Europe. We included acute stroke patients who underwent MT between January 2017 and May 2020. We compared baseline features, vascular risk factors, location of occlusion, procedural metrics, complications, and discharge outcomes between patients presenting before (before February 2020) and those who presented during the pandemic (February to May 2020). RESULTS: We identified 2083 stroke patients: of those 235 (11.3%) underwent MT during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with pre-pandemic, stroke patients who received MT during the pandemic had longer procedure duration (44 vs 38 min, P=0.006), longer length of hospitalization (6 vs 4 days, P<0.001), and higher in-hospital mortality (18.7% vs 11%, P<0.001). Importantly, there was a lower number of African American patients undergoing MT during the COVID-19 pandemic (609 (32.9%) vs 56 (23.8%); P=0.004). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care process for stroke patients receiving MT globally. There is a significant decline in the number of African American patients receiving MT, which mandates further investigation.


Subject(s)
African Americans/ethnology , COVID-19/ethnology , Healthcare Disparities/trends , Pandemics , Stroke/ethnology , Thrombectomy/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Internationality , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Registries , Risk Factors , Stroke/therapy , Thrombectomy/methods , Treatment Outcome
3.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 12(11): 1039-1044, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-742246

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many centers altered stroke triage protocols for the protection of their providers. However, the effect of workflow changes on stroke patients receiving mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has not been systematically studied. METHODS: A prospective international study was launched at the initiation of the COVID-19 pandemic. All included centers participated in the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR) and Endovascular Neurosurgery Research Group (ENRG). Data was collected during the peak months of the COVID-19 surge at each site. Collected data included patient and disease characteristics. A generalized linear model with logit link function was used to estimate the effect of general anesthesia (GA) on in-hospital mortality and discharge outcome controlling for confounders. RESULTS: 458 patients and 28 centers were included from North America, South America, and Europe. Five centers were in high-COVID burden counties (HCC) in which 9/104 (8.7%) of patients were positive for COVID-19 compared with 4/354 (1.1%) in low-COVID burden counties (LCC) (P<0.001). 241 patients underwent pre-procedure GA. Compared with patients treated awake, GA patients had longer door to reperfusion time (138 vs 100 min, P=<0.001). On multivariate analysis, GA was associated with higher probability of in-hospital mortality (RR 1.871, P=0.029) and lower probability of functional independence at discharge (RR 0.53, P=0.015). CONCLUSION: We observed a low rate of COVID-19 infection among stroke patients undergoing MT in LCC. Overall, more than half of the patients underwent intubation prior to MT, leading to prolonged door to reperfusion time, higher in-hospital mortality, and lower likelihood of functional independence at discharge.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Stroke/therapy , Thrombectomy/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anesthesia, General , COVID-19 , Endovascular Procedures , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Independent Living , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Reperfusion , Thrombectomy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Workflow
4.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 12(9): 831-835, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-626369

ABSTRACT

To assess the impact of COVID-19 on neurovascular research and deal with the challenges imposed by the pandemic. METHODS: A survey-based study focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm studies for acute ischemic stroke and cerebral aneurysms was developed by a group of senior neurointerventionalists and sent to sites identified through the clinical trials website (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), study sponsors, and physician investigators. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 101 institutions, with 65 responding (64%). Stroke RCTs were being conducted at 40 (62%) sites, aneurysm RCTs at 22 (34%) sites, stroke single-arm studies at 37 (57%) sites, and aneurysm single-arm studies at 43 (66%) sites. Following COVID-19, enrollment was suspended at 51 (78%) sites-completely at 21 (32%) and partially at 30 (46%) sites. Missed trial-related clinics and imaging follow-ups and protocol deviations were reported by 27 (42%), 24 (37%), and 27 (42%) sites, respectively. Negative reimbursements were reported at 17 (26%) sites. The majority of sites, 49 (75%), had put new trials on hold. Of the coordinators, 41 (63%) worked from home and 20 (31%) reported a personal financial impact. Remote consent was possible for some studies at 34 (52%) sites and for all studies at 5 (8%) sites. At sites with suspended trials (n=51), endovascular treatment without enrollment occurred at 31 (61%) sites for stroke and 23 (45%) sites for aneurysms. A total of 277 patients with acute ischemic stroke and 184 with cerebral aneurysms were treated without consideration for trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Widespread disruption of neuroendovascular trials occurred because of COVID-19. As sites resume clinical research, steps to mitigate similar challenges in the future should be considered.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Brain Ischemia/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods , Stroke/therapy , Surveys and Questionnaires , Brain Ischemia/diagnosis , Brain Ischemia/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Endovascular Procedures/methods , Endovascular Procedures/trends , Female , Forecasting , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/epidemiology
5.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 12(7): 643-647, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-327010

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infection from the SARS-CoV-2 virus has led to the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the large number of patients affected, healthcare personnel and facility resources are stretched to the limit; however, the need for urgent and emergent neurosurgical care continues. This article describes best practices when performing neurosurgical procedures on patients with COVID-19 based on multi-institutional experiences. METHODS: We assembled neurosurgical practitioners from 13 different health systems from across the USA, including those in hot spots, to describe their practices in managing neurosurgical emergencies within the COVID-19 environment. RESULTS: Patients presenting with neurosurgical emergencies should be considered as persons under investigation (PUI) and thus maximal personal protective equipment (PPE) should be donned during interaction and transfer. Intubations and extubations should be done with only anesthesia staff donning maximal PPE in a negative pressure environment. Operating room (OR) staff should enter the room once the air has been cleared of particulate matter. Certain OR suites should be designated as covid ORs, thus allowing for all neurosurgical cases on covid/PUI patients to be performed in these rooms, which will require a terminal clean post procedure. Each COVID OR suite should be attached to an anteroom which is a negative pressure room with a HEPA filter, thus allowing for donning and doffing of PPE without risking contamination of clean areas. CONCLUSION: Based on a multi-institutional collaborative effort, we describe best practices when providing neurosurgical treatment for patients with COVID-19 in order to optimize clinical care and minimize the exposure of patients and staff.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/surgery , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Personnel/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Neurosurgical Procedures/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/surgery , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , COVID-19 , Humans , Neurosurgical Procedures/adverse effects , Operating Rooms/methods , Operating Rooms/standards , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , SARS-CoV-2
6.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 12(7): 654-657, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-223372

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Enrollment in time-sensitive endovascular stroke trials can be challenging because of an inability to consent a debilitated patient. Often the legally authorized representative is not on site. Remote consent procedures in the US are inconsistent with the majority of sites shunning these approaches. The current pandemic with visitor restrictions highlights the need for enhancing these options. METHODS: Remote electronic and phone consent procedures specifically for endovascular stroke trials from two comprehensive stroke centers (CSC) are presented. An overview of the genesis of informed consent procedures in the US is also included. RESULTS: The two CSCs identified as Institution-1 and Institution-2 are large tertiary systems. Institution-1 is a non-profit university-affiliated academic medical center in rural geography. Institution-2 is an HCA hospital in an urban environment. Both serve patients through a spoke-and-hub network, have participated in multiple randomized endovascular stroke trials, and have successfully used these remote options for enrollment. A tiered approach is employed at both institutions with an emphasis on obtaining informed consent in person and resorting to alternatives methods when efforts to that are unsuccessful. A rationale for electronic and phone consent is included, followed by step-by-step illustration of the process at each institution. CONCLUSION: Two examples of remote electronic or phone consent procedures from institutions in different geographic environments and organization structures demonstrate that these options can be successfully used for enrollment in stroke trials. The current pandemic highlights the need to enhance these approaches while maintaining appropriate adherence to ethical and legal frameworks.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Informed Consent , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Stroke/epidemiology , Telemedicine/methods , Academic Medical Centers/methods , COVID-19 , Cell Phone , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Selection , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Stroke/diagnosis , Stroke/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL