-
Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira... Feb 2021Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can affect the nervous system, triggering problems such as the Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), an...
BACKGROUND
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can affect the nervous system, triggering problems such as the Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), an association that can bring complications to the patient.
OBJECTIVE
This scoping review aimed to clarify the clinical features and analyze patients with GBS associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, looking at morbidity, mortality, and neurological outcomes.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The search was conducted through Medline, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHAL, Latin-American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS), clinicaltrials.gov, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Observational studies, published after 2019, describe patients with GBS associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There were no language restrictions while selecting the studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three authors, Kleyton Santos de Medeiros, Luíza Thomé de Araújo Macêdo, and Wederson Farias de Souza, independently screened the search results using titles and abstracts. Duplicate studies were excluded. The same authors then went through the entire text to determine whether the studies met the inclusion criteria. Discrepancies were resolved by other reviewers, Ana Paula Ferreira Costa, Ayane Cristine Sarmento, and Ana Katherine Gonçalves. Finally, the selection of the studies was summarized in a PRISMA flow diagram.
MAIN RESULTS
Main manifestations were fever, coughing, dyspnea, sore throat, ageusia, anosmia, and respiratory failure, in addition to paresthesia of the upper and lower limbs, tetraparesis, facial diplegia, areflexia, asthenia, mastoid pain, acute ataxia, fatigue, numbness, swallowing disorder, and moderate low back pain.
CONCLUSION
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can trigger the GBS, despite the few studies on this topic. Patients had clinical manifestations of COVID-19 infection and neurological manifestations characterizing GBS.
Topics: COVID-19; Dyspnea; Fever; Guillain-Barre Syndrome; Humans; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34406260
DOI: 10.1590/1806-9282.67.2.20200716 -
The Canadian Journal of Neurological... Jul 2022Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with various neurological and atypical head/eyes/ears/nose/throat (HEENT) manifestations. We sought to review the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with various neurological and atypical head/eyes/ears/nose/throat (HEENT) manifestations. We sought to review the evidence for these manifestations.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compiled studies published until March 31, 2021 that examined non-respiratory HEENT, central, and peripheral nervous system presentations in COVID-19 patients. We included 477 studies for qualitative synthesis and 59 studies for meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Anosmia, ageusia, and conjunctivitis may precede typical upper/lower respiratory symptoms. Central nervous system (CNS) manifestations include stroke and encephalopathy, potentially with brainstem or cranial nerve involvement. MRI studies support CNS para-/postinfectious etiologies, but direct neuroinvasion seems very rare, with few cases detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the CNS. Peripheral nervous system (PNS) manifestations include muscle damage, Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), and its variants. There was moderate-to-high study heterogeneity and risk of bias. In random-effects meta-analyses, anosmia/ageusia was estimated to occur in 56% of COVID-19 patients (95% CI: 0.41-0.71, I2:99.9%), more commonly than in patients without COVID-19 (OR: 14.28, 95% CI: 8.39-24.29, I2: 49.0%). Neurological symptoms were estimated to occur in 36% of hospitalized patients (95% CI: 0.31-0.42, I2: 99.8%); ischemic stroke in 3% (95% CI: 0.03-0.04, I2: 99.2%), and GBS in 0.04% (0.033%-0.047%), more commonly than in patients without COVID-19 (OR[stroke]: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.16-5.50, I2: 76.4%; OR[GBS]: 3.43,1.15-10.25, I2: 89.1%).
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is mostly from retrospective cohorts or series, largely in hospitalized or critically ill patients, not representative of typical community-dwelling patients. There remains a paucity of systematically gathered prospective data on neurological manifestations. Nevertheless, these findings support a high index of suspicion to identify HEENT/neurological presentations in patients with known COVID-19, and to test for COVID-19 in patients with such presentations at risk of infection.
Topics: Ageusia; Anosmia; COVID-19; Guillain-Barre Syndrome; Humans; Nervous System Diseases; Pharynx; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; SARS-CoV-2; Stroke
PubMed: 34287109
DOI: 10.1017/cjn.2021.180 -
Journal of Global Health Jun 2021We determined the clinical presentation, risk factors, and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19 and identified if these are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A systematic review and meta-analysis of data on pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19: Clinical presentation, and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes based on COVID-19 severity.
BACKGROUND
We determined the clinical presentation, risk factors, and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19 and identified if these are different based on COVID-19 severity.
METHODS
We included all observational studies on pregnant women with confirmed COVID-19 reporting clinical presentation, risk factors, and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. We included all studies published between Dec/2019-Feb/2021 in Medline, Embase, the WHO COVID-19 databases, and clinicaltrials.gov. The methodological quality of cohort and case-series was assessed using NHLBI criteria.
RESULTS
31 016 pregnant women from 62 studies were included. Women were an average of 30.9 years of age, most (77.7%) were in the third trimester, and 16.4% developed severe COVID-19. Nearly half were asymptomatic, while the most commonly reported symptoms were cough, fever, fatigue, and anosmia/ageusia. About 7% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), 8% required mechanical ventilation, and 2% of the women died. Almost 80% of women delivered; 48.4% had cesarean births. Among newborns, 23.4% were preterm (<37 weeks), 16.6% were low birth weight, and 23.7% were admitted to neonatal ICU. A total of 21 stillbirths (1.6%) and 24 neonatal deaths (1.6%) were recorded, while 50 babies (3.5%) were COVID-19 positive. Studies comparing pregnant women with severe and non-severe COVID-19 showed that women with severe COVID-19 were 3.7 years older and the risk of severe COVID-19 was 1.5 times higher among women >35 years. The risk of severe COVID-19 was significantly higher among women who were obese, had smoked, diabetic, and had pre-eclampsia. The risk of preterm birth was almost 2.4 folds among women with severe COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review suggests a heightened risk of COVID-19 severity and adverse pregnancy and perinatal outcomes among women with certain demographic and health profiles. These findings can inform the formation of current guidelines; however, these should be constantly updated as the global COVID-19 scenario unfolds.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: CRD42020182048.
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pandemics; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnant Women; Premature Birth; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34221361
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.11.05018 -
European Journal of Internal Medicine Oct 2021Single studies support the presence of several post-COVID-19 symptoms; however, no meta-analysis differentiating hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Single studies support the presence of several post-COVID-19 symptoms; however, no meta-analysis differentiating hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients has been published to date. This meta-analysis analyses the prevalence of post-COVID-19 symptoms in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients recovered from COVID-19 .
METHODS
MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases, as well as medRxiv and bioRxiv preprint servers were searched up to March 15, 2021. Peer-reviewed studies or preprints reporting data on post-COVID-19 symptoms collected by personal, telephonic or electronic interview were included. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We used a random-effects models for meta-analytical pooled prevalence of each post-COVID-19 symptom, and I² statistics for heterogeneity. Data synthesis was categorized at 30, 60, and ≥90 days after .
RESULTS
From 15,577 studies identified, 29 peer-reviewed studies and 4 preprints met inclusion criteria. The sample included 15,244 hospitalized and 9011 non-hospitalized patients. The methodological quality of most studies was fair. The results showed that 63.2, 71.9 and 45.9% of the sample exhibited ≥one post-COVID-19 symptom at 30, 60, or ≥90days after onset/hospitalization. Fatigue and dyspnea were the most prevalent symptoms with a pooled prevalence ranging from 35 to 60% depending on the follow-up. Other post-COVID-19 symptoms included cough (20-25%), anosmia (10-20%), ageusia (15-20%) or joint pain (15-20%). Time trend analysis revealed a decreased prevalence 30days after with an increase after 60days .
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis shows that post-COVID-19 symptoms are present in more than 60% of patients infected by SARS-CoV‑2. Fatigue and dyspnea were the most prevalent post-COVID-19 symptoms, particularly 60 and ≥90 days after.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Peer Review; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Survivors
PubMed: 34167876
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2021.06.009 -
Revista Cientifica Odontologica... 2021To assess the prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection according to the evidence reported in the scientific...
AIM
To assess the prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection according to the evidence reported in the scientific literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of articles published between December 19, 2019, and December 20, 2020 in the Medline, Lilacs, BVS, Cochrane, SCOPUS and ScienceDirect databases. The information search strategy was based on the classic PRISMA flow diagram. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
443 articles were found in six databases, and a total of 7 articles were included after evaluation according to the selection criteria. The articles addressed the variable of taste disorders in three ways: ageusia, dysgeusia and hypogeusia; finding that this clinical manifestation was present from the beginning of the infection.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of taste disorders in children and adolescents diagnosed with coronavirus infection is from 3.3% to 26.9%.
PubMed: 38465279
DOI: 10.21142/2523-2754-0902-2021-061 -
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery Aug 2021We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function due to COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion.
OBJECTIVE
We reviewed the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function due to COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase to identify publications that described at least one patient with COVID-19 who had altered olfactory/gustatory function and had CSF testing performed. The search ranged from December 1, 2019 to November 18, 2020.
RESULTS
We identified 51 publications that described 70 patients who met inclusion criteria. Of 51 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing, 3 (6%) patients had positive results and 1 (2%) patient had indeterminate results. Cycle threshold (Ct; the number of amplification cycles required for the target gene to exceed the threshold, which is inversely related to viral load) was not provided for the patients with a positive PCR. The patient with indeterminate results had a Ct of 37 initially, then no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA on repeat testing. Of 6 patients who had CSF SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing, 3 (50%) were positive. Testing to distinguish intrathecal antibody synthesis from transudation of antibodies to the CSF via breakdown of the blood-brain barrier was performed in 1/3 (33%) patients; this demonstrated antibody transmission to the CSF via transudation.
CONCLUSION
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare in patients with altered olfactory/gustatory function. While pathology studies are needed, our review suggests it is unlikely that these symptoms are related to viral neuroinvasion.
Topics: Biomarkers; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Taste Disorders
PubMed: 34146842
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.106760 -
Brain, Behavior, & Immunity - Health Aug 2021Among Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, Olfactory (OD) and Gustatory (GD) Dysfunctions (OGD) have drawn considerable attention, becoming a sort of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Among Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifestations, Olfactory (OD) and Gustatory (GD) Dysfunctions (OGD) have drawn considerable attention, becoming a sort of hallmark of the disease. Many have speculated on the pathogenesis and clinical characteristics of these disturbances; however, no definite answers have been produced on the topic. With this systematic review, we aimed to collect all the available evidence regarding the prevalence of OGD, the timing of their onset and their resolution, their rate of recovery and their role as diagnostic and prognostic tools for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.
METHODS
A systematic review comprising all the observational studies that reported the prevalence and/or the longitudinal trajectories of OGD in COVID-19 patients, as self-reported by patients or measured through objective psychophysical tests.
RESULTS
After the selection process, 155 studies were included, with a total of 70,920 patients and 105,291 not-infected individuals. Prevalence reports were extremely variable across studies, with wide ranges for OD (0%-98%) and GD (0-89%) prevalence. OGD occurred early during the disease course and only rarely preceded other symptoms; out of 30 studies with a follow-up time of at least 20 days, only in 5 studies OGD fully resolved in more than 90% of patients. OGD had low sensitivity and high specificity for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accuracy of OD and GD for infection identification was higher than 80% in 10 out of 33 studies and in 8 out of 22 studies considered, respectively. 28 out of 30 studies that studied the association between OGD and disease severity found how OGD were associated with lower rates of severe pneumonia, hospitalization and mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
OGD seem to be highly prevalent in SARS-CoV-2 infection. They occur early, concomitantly with other symptoms and often persist after recovery, in some cases for months; whether a full recovery eventually occurs in all cases is not clear yet. OGD are good predictors of SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with a milder disease course.
PubMed: 34027497
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbih.2021.100268 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2021The clinical implications of SARS-CoV-2 infection are highly variable. Some people with SARS-CoV-2 infection remain asymptomatic, whilst the infection can cause mild to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical implications of SARS-CoV-2 infection are highly variable. Some people with SARS-CoV-2 infection remain asymptomatic, whilst the infection can cause mild to moderate COVID-19 and COVID-19 pneumonia in others. This can lead to some people requiring intensive care support and, in some cases, to death, especially in older adults. Symptoms such as fever, cough, or loss of smell or taste, and signs such as oxygen saturation are the first and most readily available diagnostic information. Such information could be used to either rule out COVID-19, or select patients for further testing. This is an update of this review, the first version of which published in July 2020.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of signs and symptoms to determine if a person presenting in primary care or to hospital outpatient settings, such as the emergency department or dedicated COVID-19 clinics, has COVID-19.
SEARCH METHODS
For this review iteration we undertook electronic searches up to 15 July 2020 in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the University of Bern living search database. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies were eligible if they included patients with clinically suspected COVID-19, or if they recruited known cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Studies were eligible when they recruited patients presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings. Studies in hospitalised patients were only included if symptoms and signs were recorded on admission or at presentation. Studies including patients who contracted SARS-CoV-2 infection while admitted to hospital were not eligible. The minimum eligible sample size of studies was 10 participants. All signs and symptoms were eligible for this review, including individual signs and symptoms or combinations. We accepted a range of reference standards.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Pairs of review authors independently selected all studies, at both title and abstract stage and full-text stage. They resolved any disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently extracted data and resolved disagreements by discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias using the Quality Assessment tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) checklist. We presented sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, in receiver operating characteristic space and in dumbbell plots. We estimated summary parameters using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis whenever five or more primary studies were available, and whenever heterogeneity across studies was deemed acceptable.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 44 studies including 26,884 participants in total. Prevalence of COVID-19 varied from 3% to 71% with a median of 21%. There were three studies from primary care settings (1824 participants), nine studies from outpatient testing centres (10,717 participants), 12 studies performed in hospital outpatient wards (5061 participants), seven studies in hospitalised patients (1048 participants), 10 studies in the emergency department (3173 participants), and three studies in which the setting was not specified (5061 participants). The studies did not clearly distinguish mild from severe COVID-19, so we present the results for all disease severities together. Fifteen studies had a high risk of bias for selection of participants because inclusion in the studies depended on the applicable testing and referral protocols, which included many of the signs and symptoms under study in this review. This may have especially influenced the sensitivity of those features used in referral protocols, such as fever and cough. Five studies only included participants with pneumonia on imaging, suggesting that this is a highly selected population. In an additional 12 studies, we were unable to assess the risk for selection bias. This makes it very difficult to judge the validity of the diagnostic accuracy of the signs and symptoms from these included studies. The applicability of the results of this review update improved in comparison with the original review. A greater proportion of studies included participants who presented to outpatient settings, which is where the majority of clinical assessments for COVID-19 take place. However, still none of the studies presented any data on children separately, and only one focused specifically on older adults. We found data on 84 signs and symptoms. Results were highly variable across studies. Most had very low sensitivity and high specificity. Only cough (25 studies) and fever (7 studies) had a pooled sensitivity of at least 50% but specificities were moderate to low. Cough had a sensitivity of 67.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 59.8% to 74.1%) and specificity of 35.0% (95% CI 28.7% to 41.9%). Fever had a sensitivity of 53.8% (95% CI 35.0% to 71.7%) and a specificity of 67.4% (95% CI 53.3% to 78.9%). The pooled positive likelihood ratio of cough was only 1.04 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.11) and that of fever 1.65 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.93). Anosmia alone (11 studies), ageusia alone (6 studies), and anosmia or ageusia (6 studies) had sensitivities below 50% but specificities over 90%. Anosmia had a pooled sensitivity of 28.0% (95% CI 17.7% to 41.3%) and a specificity of 93.4% (95% CI 88.3% to 96.4%). Ageusia had a pooled sensitivity of 24.8% (95% CI 12.4% to 43.5%) and a specificity of 91.4% (95% CI 81.3% to 96.3%). Anosmia or ageusia had a pooled sensitivity of 41.0% (95% CI 27.0% to 56.6%) and a specificity of 90.5% (95% CI 81.2% to 95.4%). The pooled positive likelihood ratios of anosmia alone and anosmia or ageusia were 4.25 (95% CI 3.17 to 5.71) and 4.31 (95% CI 3.00 to 6.18) respectively, which is just below our arbitrary definition of a 'red flag', that is, a positive likelihood ratio of at least 5. The pooled positive likelihood ratio of ageusia alone was only 2.88 (95% CI 2.02 to 4.09). Only two studies assessed combinations of different signs and symptoms, mostly combining fever and cough with other symptoms. These combinations had a specificity above 80%, but at the cost of very low sensitivity (< 30%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The majority of individual signs and symptoms included in this review appear to have very poor diagnostic accuracy, although this should be interpreted in the context of selection bias and heterogeneity between studies. Based on currently available data, neither absence nor presence of signs or symptoms are accurate enough to rule in or rule out COVID-19. The presence of anosmia or ageusia may be useful as a red flag for COVID-19. The presence of fever or cough, given their high sensitivities, may also be useful to identify people for further testing. Prospective studies in an unselected population presenting to primary care or hospital outpatient settings, examining combinations of signs and symptoms to evaluate the syndromic presentation of COVID-19, are still urgently needed. Results from such studies could inform subsequent management decisions.
Topics: Ageusia; Ambulatory Care; Anosmia; Arthralgia; Bias; COVID-19; Cough; Diarrhea; Dyspnea; Fatigue; Fever; Headache; Humans; Myalgia; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital; Pandemics; Physical Examination; Primary Health Care; SARS-CoV-2; Selection Bias; Symptom Assessment
PubMed: 33620086
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013665.pub2 -
Reviews in the Neurosciences Apr 2021The ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected more than 27 million confirmed cases and 8,90,000 deaths all around the world. Verity of viral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected more than 27 million confirmed cases and 8,90,000 deaths all around the world. Verity of viral infections can infect the nervous system; these viral infections can present a wide range of manifestation. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the COVID-19 associated central nervous system manifestations, mental and neurological symptoms. For that we conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review of four online databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Embase. All relevant articles that reported psychiatric/psychological symptoms or disorders in COVID-19 without considering time and language restrictions were assessed. All the study procedures were performed based on the PRISMA criteria. Due to the screening, 14 studies were included. The current study result indicated that, the pooled prevalence of CNS or mental associated disorders with 95% CI was 50.68% (6.68-93.88). The most prevalence symptoms were hyposmia/anosmia/olfactory dysfunction (number of study: 10) with 36.20% (14.99-60.51). Only one study reported numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia. Pooled prevalence of numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia was 5.83% (2.17-12.25) and 2.39% (10.75-14.22). The pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety was 3.52% (2.62-4.54) and 13.92% (9.44-19.08). Our findings demonstrate that COVID-19 has a certain relation with neurological symptoms. The hypsomia, anosmia or olfactory dysfunction was most frequent symptom. Other symptoms were headache or dizziness, dysgeusia or ageusia, dysphonia and fatigue. Depression, anxiety, and confusion were less frequent symptoms.
Topics: Anosmia; Anxiety; COVID-19; Depression; Dysgeusia; Dysphonia; Fatigue; Headache; Humans; Hypesthesia; Nervous System Diseases; Paresthesia; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33618441
DOI: 10.1515/revneuro-2020-0108 -
The Egyptian Journal of Neurology,... 2021COVID-19 infection can show various manifestation, including neurologic manifestations, such as , , or , and causes the neurologic disorder such as stroke,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 infection can show various manifestation, including neurologic manifestations, such as , , or , and causes the neurologic disorder such as stroke, Guillain-Barre syndrome, encephalopathy, and many more.
AIM
To briefly review neurologic manifestation in COVID-19 infection in the Asia region (South East Asia and the Western Pacific Region).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This review uses the PRISMA statement and checklist. The source for reviewed article was performed in PubMed that were published between December 2019 to September 2020 with the latest 1 year of publication. Study titles were first screened, then reviewed by title and abstract and then the last review, we tested full text and applied eligibility criteria.
RESULTS
We found a total of 9 retrieved articles from the electronic database. Among these 9 articles, 5 of them are case report, 1 case series, 1 prospective multi-center cohort study, 1 retrospective multi-center study, and 1 retrospective observational study. All articles reported confirmed COVID-19, confirmation by positive swab test using the real-time RT-PCR method, with neurologic manifestations, disorder, or syndrome on presentation or found during hospital stay. In case of neurologic disorder or syndrome, the studies reported encephalitis and ADEM, acute cerebrovascular disease, acute symptomatic seizure, and Guillain-Barré syndrome with acute cerebrovascular disease as the most common neurologic disorder associated with COVID-19 infection, followed by encephalitis.
CONCLUSION
COVID-19 also affects the brain, which may result in a global or focal neurologic manifestation. Healthcare provider treating patient with COVID-19 infection should also be aware of neurologic manifestation associated with COVID-19 infection to improve patient's outcome.Guillain-Barre syndrome, encephalopathy, and many more. This review will briefly review neurologic manifestation in COVID-19 infection in the Asian region (South East Asia and the Western Pacific Region. A total of 9 retrieved articles from the electronic database reported confirmed COVID-19, confirmation by RT-PCR method, with neurologic manifestation, disorder, or syndrome on presentation or found during hospital stay. Healthcare provider treating patient with COVID-19 infection should also be aware of neurologic manifestation associated with COVID-19 infection to improve patient's outcome.
PubMed: 33613024
DOI: 10.1186/s41983-021-00279-3