RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Central nervous system complications are reported in an increasing number of patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19-related Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is of particular importance given its association with higher mortality rates and prolonged respiratory failure. REVIEW SUMMARY: We conducted a systematic review of published cases for COVID-19-related GBS, and provide a summary of clinical management strategies for these cases. Sixty-three studies, including 86 patients, were included. Seventy-six cases with reported outcome data were eligible for the outcome analysis. Ninety-nine percent of patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 before diagnosis of GBS (median: 14 d prior, interquartile range: 7 to 20). Intravenous immunotherapy (intravenous immunoglobulin: 0.4 g/kg/d for 5 d) was the most frequently used treatment approach. The review indicated that the outcome was not favorable in 26% of cases (persistent neurological deficits). A mortality rate of 3.5% was observed in patients with COVID-19-related GBS. CONCLUSIONS: Although evidence to support specific treatments is lacking, clinicians should consider the benefits of immunotherapy and plasma exchange in addition to the standard antimicrobial and supportive therapies for patients who meet the diagnostic criteria for acute sensory and motor polyradiculoneuritis. Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment alone is not shown to result in improved outcomes or mortality. More extensive studies aimed at exploring the neurological manifestations and complications of COVID-19 and distinctive treatment options for COVID-19-related GBS are warranted.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré , Imunoglobulinas Intravenosas , SARS-CoV-2 , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide , Humanos , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/tratamento farmacológico , Imunoglobulinas Intravenosas/uso terapêutico , Troca Plasmática/métodos , Plasmaferese/efeitos adversos , Plasmaferese/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Brachiocephalic arteriovenous fistulas (BCFs) are commonly placed in outpatient settings. The impact of general anesthesia (GA), regional anesthesia (RA), or local anesthesia (LA) on perioperative recovery and fistula maturation/patency after outpatient BCF creations is unknown. We evaluated whether outcomes of outpatient BCF creations vary based on anesthesia modality. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (2011-2018) national database was queried for outpatient BCF creations. Anesthesia modalities included GA, RA, and LA. Perioperative, 3-month, and 1-year outcomes were compared between GA versus RA/LA anesthesia types. RESULTS: Among 3,527 outpatient BCF creations, anesthesia types were GA in 1,043 (29.6%), RA in 1,150 (32.6%), and LA in 1,334 (37.8%). Patients receiving GA were more often younger, obese, Medicaid recipients, without coronary artery disease, and treated in non-office-based settings (P < 0.05 for all). GA compared with RA/LA cohorts were more often admitted postoperatively (5.3% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.001) but had similar rates of thirty-day mortality (0.9 vs. 0.6%, P = 0.39). 3-month access utilization for hemodialysis was lower in GA than in RA/LA cohorts (12.6% vs. 23.6%, P < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that GA and RA/LA cohorts had similar 1-year primary access occlusion-free survival (43.6% vs. 47.1%, P = 0.24) and endovascular/open reintervention-free survival (57.2% vs. 57.6%, P = 0.98). On multivariable analysis, GA compared with RA/LA use was independently associated with increased postoperative admission (odds ratio [OR]: 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.67, P = 0.02) and decreased 3-month access utilization (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25-0.61, P < 0.001) but had similar 1-year access occlusion (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.9-1.32, P = 0.36) and reintervention (HR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.26, P = 0.88). On subgroup analysis of the RA/LA cohort, RA compared with LA was associated with increased 3-month access utilization (OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.01-2.5; P = 0.04) and 1-year access reintervention (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.12-1.89), but had similar 1-year access occlusion (HR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.95-1.51, P = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with RA/LA use, GA use in patients undergoing outpatient BCF creations was associated with increased hospital admissions, decreased access utilization at 3 months, and similar 1-year access occlusion and reintervention. RA/LA is preferable to expedite recovery and access utilization.