COVID-19 Impact on Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment at 9 Comprehensive Stroke Centers across Los Angeles.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of COVID-19 on acute cerebrovascular disease care across 9 comprehensive stroke centers throughout Los Angeles County (LAC). METHODS: Volume of emergency stroke code activations, patient characteristics, stroke severity, reperfusion rates, treatment times, and outcomes from February 1 to April 30, 2020, were compared against the same time period in 2019. Demographic data were provided by each participating institution. RESULTS: There was a 17.3% decrease in stroke code activations across LAC in 2020 compared to 2019 (1,786 vs. 2,159, respectively, χ2 goodness of fit test p < 0.0001) across 9 participating comprehensive stroke centers. Patients who did not receive any reperfusion therapy decreased by 16.6% in 2020 (1,527) compared to 2019 (1,832). Patients who received only intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) therapy decreased by 31.8% (107 vs. 157). Patients who received only mechanical thrombectomy (MT) increased by 3% (102 vs. 99). Patients who received both IVT and MT decreased by 31.8% (45 vs. 66). Recanalization treatment times in 2020 were comparable to 2019. CSCs serving a higher proportion of Latinx populations in the eastern parts of LAC experienced a higher incidence of MT in 2020 compared to 2019. Mild increase in stroke severity was seen in 2020 compared to 2019 (8.95 vs. 8.23, p = 0.046). A higher percentage of patients were discharged home in 2020 compared to 2019 (59.5 vs. 56.1%, p = 0.034), a lower percentage of patients were discharged to skilled nursing facility (16.1 vs. 20.7%, p = 0.0004), and a higher percentage of patients expired (8.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: LAC saw a decrease in overall stroke code activations in 2020 compared to 2019. Reperfusion treatment times remained comparable to prepandemic metrics. There has been an increase in severe stroke incidence and higher volume of thrombectomy treatments in Latinx communities within LAC during the pandemic of 2020. More patients were discharged home, less patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities, and more patients expired in 2020, compared to the same time frame in 2019.

Clinical Impact of Initiation of U-500 Insulin vs Continuation of U-100 Insulin in Subjects With Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus (DM) has each increased drastically according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Growth of severe insulinresistant DM is predicted. U-500 insulin is highly concentrated and can replace less concentrated formulations in patients that need high insulin dosages. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of U-500 and U-100 insulin regimens in veterans with obesity and insulin resistance. METHODS: A single-site retrospective chart analysis of adult subjects was conducted from July 2002 to June 2011. Data for repeated measures spanned a period from 3 months before the intervention (baseline) through 12 months afterward. The main outcome was the variation in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Other outcomes included incidence of severe hypoglycemia, weight changes, cardiovascular events, and number of injections. RESULTS: A total of 142 subjects (68 taking U-500 and 74 taking U-100) were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, except for weight, which was higher among U-500 subjects. Mean HbA1c was reduced by 0.84% and 0.56% in U-500 and U-100, respectively (P = .003). Severe hypoglycemia occurred in 5 subjects in the U-500 group and 1 in the U-100 group (P = .08). No significant difference was noted in the number of cardiovascular events. The mean number of daily injections was 2 in the U-500 group, and 4 in the U-100 group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: U-500 insulin, when compared with U-100 insulin regimens, led to a statistically significant reduction in HbA1c and number of insulin injections. Additional research is necessary to assess the risk of severe hypoglycemia in U-500 users. Neither regimen was associated with increased cardiovascular risk.

Clot-inducing minerals versus plasma protein dressing for topical treatment of external bleeding in the presence of coagulopathy.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies identified WoundStat (WS, smectite) and Combat Gauze (CG, kaolin-coated gauze) as the most effective available agents for controlling arterial bleeding with potential utility in casualty care. Tissue sealant properties of WS suggested its potential advantage over clot-promoting CG for treating coagulopathic bleeding. This study compared the efficacy of CG and WS with a fibrinogen-based (FAST) dressing to control bleeding in coagulopathic animals. METHODS: Coagulopathy was induced in pigs (n = 55, 35 kg) by ∼50% isovolemic hemodilution and hypothermia (core temperature, 33°C ± 0.5°C). A 6-mm arteriotomy was made in the femoral artery and free bleeding allowed for 30 seconds. A test agent (n = 13-15 per group) or control product (gauze, GZ, n = 12) was applied to the wounds and compressed with a Kerlix gauze for 2 minutes. Fluid resuscitation was given, titrated to a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg. Animals were observed for 180 minutes or until death. Angiography using the computed tomography method was performed on survivors, and local tissues were collected for histology. RESULTS: No differences were seen in baseline measures. Coagulopathy, confirmed by a 31% increase in prothrombin time and a 28% reduction in clotting strength (maximum amplitude, thrombelastography assay), was similar in all groups before injury. The average pretreatment blood loss was 11.9 mL/kg ± 0.4 mL/kg with no difference among groups. Posttreatment blood loss, however, was significantly different (p = 0.015) ranging from 18.2 mL/kg ± 8.8 mL/kg (FAST) to 63.3 mL/kg ± 10.2 mL/kg (GZ controls). Stable hemostasis was achieved in 10 of 13 (FAST), 5 of 15 (CG), 2 of 15 (WS), and 1 of 12 (GZ) animals in each group, resulting in significantly different survival rates (8-77%; p = 0.001). The average survival times were 145 (FAST), 119 (CG), 75 (WS), and 74 (GZ) minutes for different groups (p < 0.002). The outcomes with the FAST dressing were significantly better than with WS or GZ in this coagulopathic bleeding model. Essentially, no difference was found between WS and GZ control. Computed tomography images showed limited blood flow only through the vessels treated with FAST dressings. Histologic observations of the vessels indicated minimal damage with FAST and CG and greater injury with WS with some residues present on the tissues. CONCLUSION: The tissue sealant property of WS is apparently mediated by clot formation in the wound; therefore, it was ineffective under coagulopathic conditions. CG was partially effective in maintaining blood pressure up to 1 hour after application. FAST dressing showed the highest efficacy because of the exogenous delivery of concentrated fibrinogen and thrombin to the wound, which bypasses coagulopathy and secures hemostasis.