Gender Disparities in Neurological Symptoms of Long COVID: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Female gender is a known risk factor for long COVID. With the increasing number of COVID-19 cases, the corresponding number of survivors is also expected to rise. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic review has specifically addressed the gender differences in neurological symptoms of long COVID. METHODS: We included studies on female individuals who presented with specific neurological symptoms at least 12 weeks after confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis from PubMed, Central, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search limit was put for after January 2020 until June 15, 2024. We excluded studies that did not provide sex-specific outcome data, those not in English, case reports, case series, and review articles Results: A total of 5,632 eligible articles were identified. This article provides relevant information from 12 studies involving 6,849 patients, of which 3,414 were female. The sample size ranged from 70 to 2,856, with a maximum follow-up period of 18 months. The earliest publication date was September 16, 2021, while the latest was June 11, 2024. The following neurological symptoms had a significant difference in the risk ratio (RR) for female gender: fatigue RR 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-1.60, p < 0.001), headache RR 1.37 (95% CI: 1.12-1.67, p = 0.002), brain-fog RR 1.38 (95% CI 1.08-1.76, p = 0.011) depression RR 1.49 (95% CI: 1.2-1.86, p < 0.001), and anosmia RR 1.61 (95% CI: 1.36-1.90, p < 0.001). High heterogenicity was found for fatigue, brain fog, and anxiety due to the diverse methodologies employed in the studies. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that women are at a higher risk for long-COVID neurological symptoms, including fatigue, headaches, brain fog, depression, and anosmia, compared to men. The prevalence of these symptoms decreases after 1 year, based on limited data from the small number of studies available beyond this period.

Intervention modalities for brain fog caused by long-COVID: systematic review of the literature.

Individuals suffering from long-COVID can present with "brain fog", which is characterized by a range of cognitive impairments, such as confusion, short-term memory loss, and difficulty concentrating. To date, several potential interventions for brain fog have been considered. Notably, no systematic review has comprehensively discussed the impact of each intervention type on brain fog symptoms. We included studies on adult (aged > 18 years) individuals with proven long- COVID brain-fog symptoms from PubMed, MEDLINE, Central, Scopus, and Embase. A search limit was set for articles published between 01/2020 and 31/12/2023. We excluded studies lacking an objective assessment of brain fog symptoms and patients with preexisting neurological diseases that affected cognition before COVID-19 infection. This review provided relevant information from 17 studies. The rehabilitation studies utilized diverse approaches, leading to a range of outcomes in terms of the effectiveness of the interventions. Six studies described noninvasive brain stimulation, and all showed improvement in cognitive ability. Three studies described hyperbaric oxygen therapy, all of which showed improvements in cognitive assessment tests and brain perfusion. Two studies showed that the use of Palmitoylethanolamide and Luteolin (PEA-LUT) improved cognitive impairment. Noninvasive brain stimulation and hyperbaric oxygen therapy showed promising results in the treatment of brain fog symptoms caused by long-COVID, with improved perfusion and cortical excitability. Furthermore, both rehabilitation strategies and PEA-LUT administration have been associated with improvements in symptoms of brain fog. Future studies should explore combinations of interventions and include longer follow-up periods to assess the long-term effects of these treatments.

Interpretation of Heart and Lungs Sounds Acquired via Remote, Digital Auscultation Reached Fair-to-Substantial Levels of Consensus among Specialist Physicians.

BACKGROUND: Technological advancement may bridge gaps between long-practiced medical competencies and modern technologies. Such a domain is the application of digital stethoscopes used for physical examination in telemedicine. This study aimed to validate the level of consensus among physicians regarding the interpretation of remote, digital auscultation of heart and lung sounds. METHODS: Seven specialist physicians considered both the technical quality and clinical interpretation of auscultation findings of pre-recorded heart and lung sounds of patients hospitalized in their homes. TytoCareTM system was used as a remote, digital stethoscope. RESULTS: In total, 140 sounds (70 heart and 70 lungs) were presented to seven specialists. The level of agreement was measured using Fleiss' Kappa (FK) variable. Agreement relating to heart sounds reached low-to-moderate consensus: the overall technical quality (FK = 0.199), rhythm regularity (FK = 0.328), presence of murmurs (FK = 0.469), appreciation of sounds as remote (FK = 0.011), and an overall diagnosis as normal or pathologic (FK = 0.304). The interpretation of some of the lung sounds reached a higher consensus: the overall technical quality (FK = 0.169), crepitus (FK = 0.514), wheezing (FK = 0.704), bronchial sounds (FK = 0.034), and an overall diagnosis as normal or pathological (FK = 0.386). Most Fleiss' Kappa values were in the range of "fare consensus", while in the domains of diagnosing lung crepitus and wheezing, the values increased to the "substantial" level. CONCLUSIONS: Bio signals, as recorded auscultations of the heart and lung sounds serving the process of clinical assessment of remotely situated patients, do not achieve a high enough level of agreement between specialized physicians. These findings should serve as a catalyzer for improving the process of telemedicine-attained bio-signals and their clinical interpretation.