Awake craniotomy in pediatric low-grade glioma: barriers and future directions.

INTRODUCTION: The goal of surgical management in pediatric low-grade gliomas (pLGGs) is gross total resection (GTR), as it is considered curative with favorable long-term outcomes. Achieving GTR can be challenging in the setting of eloquent-region gliomas, in which resection may increase risk of neurological deficits. Awake craniotomy (AC) with intraoperative neurofunctional mapping (IONM) offers a promising approach to achieve maximal resection while preserving neurological function. However, its adoption in pediatric cases has been hindered, and barriers to its adoption have not previously been elucidated. FINDINGS: This review includes two complementary investigations. First, a survey study was conducted querying pediatric neurosurgeons on their perceived barriers to the procedure in children with pLGG. Next, these critical barriers were analyzed in the context of existing literature. These barriers included the lack of standardized IONM techniques for children, inadequate surgical and anesthesia experience, concerns regarding increased complication risks, doubts about children's ability to tolerate the procedure, and perceived non-indications due to alternative monitoring tools. CONCLUSION: Efforts to overcome these barriers include standardizing IONM protocols, refining anesthesia management, enhancing patient preparation strategies, and challenging entrenched beliefs about pediatric AC. Collaborative interdisciplinary efforts and further studies are needed to establish safety guidelines and broaden the application of AC, ultimately improving outcomes for children with pLGG.

Mimicking opioid analgesia in cortical pain circuits.

The anterior cingulate cortex plays a pivotal role in the cognitive and affective aspects of pain perception. Both endogenous and exogenous opioid signaling within the cingulate mitigate cortical nociception, reducing pain unpleasantness. However, the specific functional and molecular identities of cells mediating opioid analgesia in the cingulate remain elusive. Given the complexity of pain as a sensory and emotional experience, and the richness of ethological pain-related behaviors, we developed a standardized, deep-learning platform for deconstructing the behavior dynamics associated with the affective component of pain in mice-LUPE (Light aUtomated Pain Evaluator). LUPE removes human bias in behavior quantification and accelerated analysis from weeks to hours, which we leveraged to discover that morphine altered attentional and motivational pain behaviors akin to affective analgesia in humans. Through activity-dependent genetics and single-nuclei RNA sequencing, we identified specific ensembles of nociceptive cingulate neuron-types expressing mu-opioid receptors. Tuning receptor expression in these cells bidirectionally modulated morphine analgesia. Moreover, we employed a synthetic opioid receptor promoter-driven approach for cell-type specific optical and chemical genetic viral therapies to mimic morphine's pain-relieving effects in the cingulate, without reinforcement. This approach offers a novel strategy for precision pain management by targeting a key nociceptive cortical circuit with on-demand, non-addictive, and effective analgesia.

Provider Impressions of Inpatient Teleneurology Consultation.

Background and Objectives: Teleneurology usage has increased during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. However, studies evaluating physician impressions of inpatient teleneurology are limited. We implemented a quality improvement initiative to evaluate neurologists' impression following individual inpatient teleneurology consultation at a satellite hospital of a large academic center with no in-person neurology coverage. Methods: A REDCap survey link was embedded within templates used by neurologists for documentation of inpatient consultations to be completed immediately after encounters. All teleneurology encounters with completed surveys at a single satellite hospital of the University of Pennsylvania Health System Neurology Department between May 10, 2021, and August 14, 2022, were included. Individual patient-level and encounter-level data were extracted from the medical record. Results: A total of 374 surveys (response rate of 54.05%) were completed by 19 neurologists; 341 questionnaires were included in the analysis. Seven neurologists who specialized as neurohospitalists completed 231 surveys (67.74% of total surveys completed), while 12 non-neurohospitalists completed 110 (32.36%). The history obtained was rated as worse (14%) or the same (86%) as an in-person consult; none reported the history as better than nonteleneurology encounters. The physician-patient relationship was poor or fair in 25% of the encounters and good or excellent in 75% of visits. The overall experience was judged to be worse than in-person consultation in 32% of encounters, the same in 66%, and better in 2%. Fifty-one percent of providers responded that there were elements of the neurologic examination that might have changed their assessment and plan of care if performed in-person. Encounters with peripheral or neuromuscular-related chief complaints had the most inadequate examinations and worse overall experiences, while the most positive impressions of these clinical experiences were observed among seizure-related chief complaints. Discussion: Determining best practices for inpatient teleneurology should consider the patient chief complaint to use teleneurology in scenarios with the highest likelihood of a positive experience. Further efforts should be made to the patient experience and to improve the remote examination to enhance the applicability of teleneurology to the full spectrum of inpatient neurologic consultations.

Linked Patient and Provider Impressions of Outpatient Teleneurology Encounters.

Background and Objectives: Teleneurology is common in clinical practice partly due to the SARS CoV-2 pandemic. Impressions about teleneurology from patients and providers alike are generally favorable; some of the reported benefits include ease of access to specialized health care, savings of time and money, and similar quality of care as an in-person visit. However, comparisons between patient and provider impressions about the same teleneurology encounter have not been described. In this study, we describe patient impressions about a teleneurology encounter and evaluate concordance with provider impressions about the same encounter. Methods: Patients and providers at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital Neurology Department were surveyed about their impressions of teleneurology between April 27, 2020, and June 16, 2020. A convenience sample of patients, whose providers completed a questionnaire, were contacted by telephone to solicit their impressions about the same encounter. Unique questionnaires for patients and providers focused on similar themes, such as adequacy of technology, assessment of history obtained, and overall quality of the visit. Summaries of patient responses are reported with the raw percent agreement between patients and providers for similar questions. Results: One hundred thirty-seven patients completed the survey; 64 (47%) were male and 73 (53%) were female. Sixty-six (47%) patients had a primary diagnosis of PD, 42 (30%) a non-PD/parkinsonism movement disorder, and 29 (21%) a nonmovement disorder neurologic disease. One hundred one (76%) were established patient visits and 36 (26%) were new patient visits. Provider responses from 8 different physicians were included. Most of the patients responded that the ease of joining their visit, their comfort engaging with their physicians during their visit, understanding their plan of care after their visit, and the quality of care from their teleneurology visit were satisfactory. Patients and providers agreed about their impressions of the quality of the history obtained (87% agreement), patient-provider relationship (88% agreement), and overall quality of their experience (70% agreement). Discussion: Patients had favorable impressions about their clinical experience with teleneurology and expressed an interest in incorporating telemedicine visits into their ongoing care. Patients and providers were highly concordant for the history obtained, patient-provider relationship, and overall quality.