Pre-existing neurological conditions and COVID-19 co-infection: Data from systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and scoping reviews.

BACKGROUND: Pre-existing neurological diseases have been identified as risk factors for severe COVID-19 infection and death. There is a lack of comprehensive literature review assessing the relationship between pre-existing neurological conditions and COVID-19 outcomes. Identification of high risk groups is critical for optimal treatment and care. METHODS: A literature review was conducted for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and scoping reviews published between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2023. Literature assessing individuals with pre-existing neurological diseases and COVID-19 infection was included. Information regarding infection severity was extracted, and potential limitations were identified. RESULTS: Thirty-nine articles met inclusion criteria, with data assessing >3 million patients from 51 countries. 26/51 (50.9%) of countries analyzed were classified as high income, while the remaining represented middle-low income countries (25/51; 49.0%). A majority of evidence focused on the impact of cerebrovascular disease (17/39; 43.5%) and dementia (5/39; 12.8%) on COVID-19 severity and mortality. 92.3% of the articles (36/39) suggested a significant association between neurological conditions and increased risk of severe COVID-19 and mortality. Cerebrovascular disease, dementia, Parkinson's disease, and epilepsy were associated with increased COVID severity and mortality. CONCLUSION: Pre-existing neurological diseases including cerebrovascular disease, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, epilepsy, and Parkinson's disease are significant risk factors for severity of COVID-19 infection and mortality in the acute infectious period. Given that 61.5% (24/39) of the current evidence only includes data from 2020, further updated literature is crucial to identify the relationship between chronic neurological conditions and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 variants.

Application of VirCapSeq-VERT and BacCapSeq in the diagnosis of presumed and definitive neuroinfectious diseases.

Unbiased high-throughput sequencing (HTS) has enabled new insights into the diversity of agents implicated in central nervous system (CNS) infections. The addition of positive selection capture methods to HTS has enhanced the sensitivity while reducing sequencing costs and the complexity of bioinformatic analysis. Here we report the use of virus capture-based sequencing for vertebrate viruses (VirCapSeq-VERT) and bacterial capture sequencing (BacCapSeq) in investigating CNS infections. Thirty-four samples were categorized: (1) patients with definitive CNS infection by routine testing; (2) patients meeting clinically the Brighton criteria (BC) for meningoencephalitis; (3) patients with presumptive infectious etiology highest on the differential. RNA extracts from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were used for VirCapSeq-VERT, and DNA extracts were used for BacCapSeq analysis. Among 8 samples from known CNS infections in group 1, VirCapSeq and BacCapSeq confirmed 3 expected diagnoses (42.8%), were negative in 2 (25%), yielded an alternative result in 1 (11.1%), and did not detect 2 expected negative pathogens. The confirmed cases identified HHV-6, HSV-2, and VZV while the negative samples included JCV and HSV-2. In groups 2 and 3, 11/26 samples (42%) were positive for at least one pathogen; however, 27% of the total samples (7/26) were positive for commensal organisms. No microbial nucleic acids were detected in negative control samples. HTS showed limited promise for pathogen identification in presumed CNS infectious diseases in our small sample. Before conducting larger-scale prospective studies to assess the clinical value of this novel technique, clinicians should understand the benefits and limitations of using this modality.

Application of VirCapSeq-VERT and BacCapSeq In the Diagnosis of Presumed and Definitive Neuroinfectious Diseases.

Background: Unbiased high-throughput sequencing (HTS) has enabled new insights into the diversity of agents implicated in central nervous system (CNS) infections. The addition of positive selection capture methods to HTS has enhanced the sensitivity while reducing sequencing costs and complexity of bioinformatic analysis. Here we report the use of virus capture based sequencing for vertebrate viruses (VirCapSeq-VERT) and bacterial capture sequencing (BacCapSeq) in investigating CNS infections. Design/Methods: Thirty-four samples were categorized: (1) Patients with definitive CNS infection by routine testing; (2) Patients meeting clinically Brighton Criteria (BC) for meningoencephalitis (3) Patients with presumptive infectious etiology highest on the differential. RNA extracts from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were used for VirCapSeq-VERT and DNA extracts were used for BacCapSeq analysis. Results: Among 8 samples from known CNS infections in group 1, VirCapSeq and BacCapSeq confirmed 3 expected diagnoses (42.8%), were negative in 2 (25%), yielded an alternative result in 1 (11.1%), and did not detect 2 expected negative pathogens. The confirmed cases identified HHV-6, HSV-2, and VZV while the negative samples included JCV and HSV-2. In groups 2 and 3,11/26 samples (42%) were positive for at least one pathogen, however 27% of the total samples (7/26) were positive for commensal organisms. No microbial nucleic acids were detected in negative control samples. Conclusions: HTS showed limited promise for pathogen identification in presumed CNS infectious diseases in our small sample. Before conducting larger-scale prospective studies to assess clinical value of this novel technique, clinicians should understand benefits and limitations of using this modality.

Neurological Considerations with COVID-19 Vaccinations.

The benefits of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination significantly outweigh its risks on a public health scale, and vaccination has been crucial in controlling the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Nonetheless, several reports of adverse events following vaccination have been published.To summarize reports to date and assess the extent and quality of evidence regarding possible serious adverse neurological events following COVID-19 vaccination, focusing on Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved vaccines in the United States (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S).A review of literature from five major electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) was conducted between December 1, 2020 and June 5, 2022. Articles included in the review were systematic reviews and meta-analysis, cohort studies, retrospective studies, case-control studies, case series, and reports. Editorials, letters, and animal studies were excluded, since these studies did not include quantitative data regarding adverse side effects of vaccination in human subjects.Of 149 total articles and 97 (65%) were case reports or case series. Three phase 3 trials initially conducted for BNT162b2, MRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S were included in the analysis.The amount and quality of evidence for possible neurological adverse events in the context of FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccinations is overall low tier. The current body of evidence continues to suggest that COVID-19 vaccinations have a high neurological safety profile; however, the risks and benefits of vaccination must continue to be closely monitored.

Ovarian resection in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis: A comparison of surgical approaches.

Background: For patients with anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis (NMDARE) and ovarian teratoma, "conservative" surgical approaches (complete or partial unilateral oophorectomy or bilateral partial oophorectomies) are associated with clinical improvement. "Aggressive" ovarian resections (complete bilateral oophorectomy or "blind" ovarian resections without pre-operative evidence of teratoma) are also reported, although the evidence supporting these approaches is unclear. Objective: To compare the one-year functional outcomes of patients with NMDARE who underwent conservative vs. aggressive ovarian resections. Methods: Patients with NMDARE undergoing ovarian resection between January 1st, 2012 and December 31st, 2021 were retrospectively identified from three North American tertiary care centers. Primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 one year after ovarian resection. Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to compare demographic features, disease characteristics, and functional outcomes between the two surgical groups. A fixed-effects meta-analysis of studies reporting functional outcomes based on surgical approach was also performed. Results: Twenty-three patients were included. Eight underwent aggressive surgical management. There was a non-significant trend toward an association between aggressive surgical management and younger age-at-onset, higher baseline disease severity, and longer delays to treatment. There was no difference between "aggressive" (3/8, 38%) and "conservative" (11/15, 73%) management groups in achieving the primary outcome (OR95% = <0.1-1.9; p = 0.18). Findings were similar when considering data from 52 patients in two published studies (RR = 0.74; CI95% = 0.48-1.13; p = 0.16). Conclusions: Aggressive ovarian resection was not associated with improved outcomes in patients with NMDARE in this series. Group differences may have contributed, recognizing that patients who underwent aggressive resection tended to be sicker, with procedures performed later in the disease course. Based on available evidence, we advocate for function-sparing resection in patients with imaging-confirmed/suspected teratoma, and repeated multi-modal imaging in at-risk patients with NMDARE refractory to conventional treatment.

Acute neurologic emerging flaviviruses.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the challenges we face as a global society in preventing and containing emerging and re-emerging pathogens. Multiple intersecting factors, including environmental changes, host immunological factors, and pathogen dynamics, are intimately connected to the emergence and re-emergence of communicable diseases. There is a large and expanding list of communicable diseases that can cause neurological damage, either through direct or indirect routes. Novel pathogens of neurotropic potential have been identified through advanced diagnostic techniques, including metagenomic next-generation sequencing, but there are also known pathogens which have expanded their geographic distribution to infect non-immune individuals. Factors including population growth, climate change, the increase in animal and human interface, and an increase in international travel and trade are contributing to the expansion of emerging and re-emerging pathogens. Challenges exist around antimicrobial misuse giving rise to antimicrobial-resistant infectious neurotropic organisms and increased susceptibility to infection related to the expanded use of immunomodulatory treatments. In this article, we will review key concepts around emerging and re-emerging pathogens and discuss factors associated with neurotropism and neuroinvasion. We highlight several neurotropic pathogens of interest, including West Nile virus (WNV), Zika Virus, Japanese Encephalitis Virus (JEV), and Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus (TBEV). We emphasize neuroinfectious diseases which impact the central nervous system (CNS) and focus on flaviviruses, a group of vector-borne pathogens that have expanded globally in recent years and have proven capable of widespread outbreak.

Evaluation of nonaccidental trauma in infants presenting with skull fractures: a retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE: Nonaccidental trauma (NAT) is one of the leading causes of serious injury and death among young children in the United States, with a high proportion of head injury. Numerous studies have demonstrated the safety of discharge of infants with isolated skull fractures (ISFs); however, these same studies have noted that those infants with suspected abuse should not be immediately discharged. The authors aimed to create a standardized protocol for evaluation of infants presenting with skull fractures to our regional level I pediatric trauma center to best identify children at risk. METHODS: A protocol for evaluation of NAT was developed by our pediatric trauma committee, which consists of evaluation by neurosurgery, pediatric surgery, and ophthalmology, as well as the pediatric child protection team. Social work evaluations and a skeletal survey were also utilized. Patients presenting over a 2-year period, inclusive of all infants younger than 12 months at the time of presentation, were assessed. Factors at presentation, protocol compliance, and the results of the workup were evaluated to determine how to optimize identification of children at risk. RESULTS: A total of 45 infants with a mean age at presentation of 5.05 months (SD 3.14 months) were included. The most common stated mechanism of injury was a fall (75.6%), followed by an unknown mechanism (22.2%). The most common presenting symptoms were swelling over the fracture site (25 patients, 55.6%), followed by vomiting (5 patients, 11.1%). For the entire population of patients with skull fractures, there was suspicion of NAT in 24 patients (53.3% of the cohort). Among the 30 patients with ISFs, there was suspicion of NAT in 13 patients (43.3% of the subgroup). CONCLUSIONS: Infants presenting with skull fractures with intracranial findings and ISFs had a substantial rate of concern for the possibility of nonaccidental skull fracture. Although prior studies have demonstrated the relative safety of discharging infants with ISFs, it is critical to establish an appropriate standardized protocol to evaluate for infants at risk of abusive head trauma.