The impact of COVID-19 on acute ischemic stroke admissions: Analysis from a community-based tertiary care center.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital admissions and outcomes in patients admitted with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: Single-center retrospective analysis of patients admitted to the hospital with acute ischemic stroke, between December 1st, 2019 and June 30th, 2020. Outcomes were classified as none-to-minimal disability, moderate-to-severe disability, and death based on discharge disposition, and compared between two time periods: pre-COVID-19 era (December 1st, 2019 to March 11th, 2020) and COVID-19 era (March 12th to June 30th, 2020). We also performed a comparative trend analysis for the equivalent period between 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: Five hundred and seventy-five patients with a mean age (years±SD) of 68±16 were admitted from December 1st, 2019 to June 30th, 2020, with a clinical diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke. Of these, 255 (44.3%) patients were admitted during the COVID-19 era. We observed a 22.1% and 39.5% decline in admission for acute ischemic stroke in April and May 2020, respectively. A significantly higher percentage of patients with acute ischemic stroke received intravenous thrombolysis during the COVID-19 era (p = 0.020). In patients with confirmed COVID-19, we found a higher percentage of older men with preexisting comorbidities such as hyperlipidemia, coronary artery disease, and diabetes mellitus but a lower rate of atrial fibrillation. In addition, we found a treatment delay in both intravenous thrombolysis (median 94.5 min versus 38 min) and mechanical thrombectomy (median 244 min versus 86 min) in patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no differences in patients' disposition including home, short-term, and long-term facility (p = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction of hospital admissions in acute ischemic strokes and some delay in reperfusion therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospective studies and a larger dataset analysis are warranted.

The safety and tolerability of different intravenous administrations of levetiracetam, bolus versus infusion, in intensive care unit patients.

This study reviews our experience with the safety and tolerability of levetiracetam (LVM) with different methods of intravenous administration in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. We used retrospective chart review to identify 33 ICU patients who received intravenous LVM for treatment of seizures. Collected data included age, gender, diagnosis on admission, dosing regimen, documented seizure activity, adverse reactions, concomitant use of other antiepileptic drugs, and condition on discharge. A total of 33 ICU patients were given intravenous (IV) LVM as add-on treatment to standard regimen for treatment of breakthrough seizures or status epilepticus or given as preventive medication postoperatively. Among these 33 patients, 16 received intravenous LVM as bolus, and 17 received intravenous LVM as continuous infusion. Safety and tolerability of intravenous LVM were evaluated on the basis of the occurrence of adverse or side effects reported in daily progress notes of the physicians and nurses. There were no significant adverse or side effects reported in daily progress notes. The addition of intravenous LVM to the standard regimen for controlling seizures in ICU patients seems feasible and tolerable.