ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: There has been a drastic reduction in the number of neurosurgeries performed during the COVID-19 pandemic due to a multitude of challenges prompting restructuring of neurosurgical services. The present study describes the challenges and outcomes of non-elective neurosurgical procedures done on COVID-19 positive patients along with the modifications in neurosurgical practice during the pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective study was done in the Department of Neurosurgery over a period of one year and three months. Demographic and clinical details including outcomes of the COVID-19 positive patients, who had undergone non-elective neurosurgical interventions, were collected. RESULTS: Ten patients (3.8%) were COVID-19 positive out of 262 neurosurgical interventions done. The age of the patients ranged from 5 days to 78 years with five males and five females. Out of the 10 patients, five were neurotrauma cases including one patient of head injury with craniovertebral junction injury. The patient with craniovertebral junction injury underwent foramen magnum decompression with C1 lateral mass-C2 pedicle screw on the right and C0-C2 pedicle screw and rod fixation on the left. The rest of the neurotrauma cases underwent craniotomy or burr-hole craniostomy followed by evacuation. Only one patient (10%) had postoperative 30-day mortality. The rest nine patients (90%) survived the post-operative 30-day mortality. The various modifications incorporated in the neurosurgical practice included categorizing the emergency room into various zones, a separate operating theatre for COVID-19 patients, limiting the number of operating members as well as minor modifications in the operating procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The postoperative surgical outcome is favorable in COVID-19 positive patients with modifications of the existing neurosurgical practices.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Symptomatic non-obstructive coronary artery disease is a growing clinical dilemma for which contemporary testing is proving to be of limited clinical utility. New methods are needed to identify cardiac dysfunction. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a prospective observational cohort study conducted from December 2013 to August 2015 in two outpatient cardiology clinics (symptomatic cohort) and 24 outpatient practices throughout the US (healthy cohort) with centralized methodology and monitoring to compare heart-rate responses during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Participants were 208 consecutive patients (median age, 61; range, 32-86years) with exercise intolerance and without prior heart or lung disease in whom coronary anatomy was defined and 116 healthy subjects (median age, 45; range, 26-66years). Compared to stress ECG, the novel change in heart-rate as a function of work-rate parameter (ΔHR-WR Slope) demonstrated significantly higher sensitivity to detect under-treated atherosclerosis with similar specificity. In men, area under the ROC curve increased from 60% to 94% for non-obstructive CAD and from 64% to 80% for obstructive CAD. In women, AUC increased from 64% to 85% for non-obstructive CAD and from 66% to 90% for obstructive CAD. ΔHR-WR Slope correctly reclassified abnormal studies in the non-obstructive CAD group from 22% to 81%; in the obstructive CAD group from 18% to 84% and in the revascularization group from 35% to 78%. CONCLUSION: Abnormal heart-rate response during CPET is more effective than stress ECG for identifying under-treated atherosclerosis and may be of utility to identify cardiac dysfunction in symptomatic patients with normal routine cardiac testing.
