-
The International Journal of... Jul 2023The current pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is accompanied with a rapid increase of reports and papers detailing its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The current pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is accompanied with a rapid increase of reports and papers detailing its neurological effects and symptoms. The virus infection causes respiratory illness named by the world health organization as corona virus 19 (COVID-19).This systematic review aims to study and summarize the different neurological manifestations of this virus. All articles published and indexed via Pubmed, Medline and Google Scholar databases between January 1st 2020 and February 28th 2021 that reported neurological symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 are reviewed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.We included data from 113 articles: eight prospective studies, 25 retrospective studies and the rest were case reports/series. COVID-19 can present with central nervous system manifestations, such as headache, encephalitis and encephalopathy, peripheral nervous system manifestations, such as anosmia, ageusia and Guillian Barre syndrome, and skeletal muscle manifestations, such as myalgia and myasthenia gravis. Our systematic review showed that COVID-19 can be manifested by a wide spectrum of neurological symptoms reported either in the early stage or within the course of the disease. However, a detailed comprehension of these manifestations is required and more studies are needed in order to improve our scientific knowledge and to develop preventive and therapeutic measures to control this pandemic.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Nervous System Diseases; Comprehension; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34433369
DOI: 10.1080/00207454.2021.1973000 -
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 -
European Neurology 2021While the most common neurologic symptoms reported in patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 are headache, dizziness, myalgia, mental fog, and anosmia, there is a growing basis...
BACKGROUND
While the most common neurologic symptoms reported in patients affected by SARS-CoV-2 are headache, dizziness, myalgia, mental fog, and anosmia, there is a growing basis of published peer-reviewed cases reporting stroke in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The peer-reviewed literature suggests an increased risk of cerebrovascular accident (CVA) in the setting of COVID-19 infection.
METHODS
We searched 3 databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL) with search terms COVID-19, novel coronavirus, stroke, and cerebrovascular accident. Case series and case studies presenting patients positive for both COVID-19 and CVA published from January 1 through September 1, 2020, were included. Data collection and analysis was completed and risk of bias assessed.
RESULTS
The search identified 28 studies across 7 counties comprising 73 patients. Amongst patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection and CVA, the average age was 60; the most common preexisting conditions were hypertension and diabetes mellitus, and those without preexisting conditions were significantly younger with an average age of 47. Amongst hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and CVA, there was a bimodal association with COVID-19 infection severity with majority of patients classified with mild or critical COVID-19 infection.
DISCUSSION
The data suggest SARS-CoV-2 is a risk factor for developing stroke, particularly in patients with hypertension and diabetes. Furthermore, the younger average age of stroke in patients with SARS-CoV-2, particularly those patients with zero identifiable preexisting conditions, creates high suspicion that SARS-CoV-2 is an independent risk factor for development of stroke; however, this cannot yet be proven without comparable control population. The data suggest the risk of developing CVA in the setting of COVID-19 infection is not dependent upon severity of illness. Continued studies must be done to understand the epidemiologic factors of COVID-19 infection and stroke and the pathophysiology of the COVID-associated hypercoagulable state.
Topics: COVID-19; Headache; Humans; Middle Aged; SARS-CoV-2; Stroke
PubMed: 34352787
DOI: 10.1159/000517403 -
Neurosurgical Review Feb 2022Vertex epidural hematoma (VEDH) is a rare extradural hematoma and often misdiagnosed because of its variety of clinical symptoms and characteristic location. Determining... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Vertex epidural hematoma (VEDH) is a rare extradural hematoma and often misdiagnosed because of its variety of clinical symptoms and characteristic location. Determining optimal timing and technique for VEDH surgery is difficult because of its midline location and atypical clinical course. This study aims to understand the clinical manifestations and current treatment strategies for VEDH. We searched the published literature regarding VEDH through PubMed and Google Scholar, and individual patient data (IPD) were obtained from the eligible articles. A systematic review and IPD meta-analysis were conducted. In total, 70 patients' individual participant data were gathered. Most patients were male (87%), and traffic-related accidents were the most common injury mechanism (49%). Approximately half the patients (47%) were neurologically intact with nonspecific symptoms such as headache, dizziness, and vomiting at admission. Motor weakness alone (17%) and symptoms related to cranial nerve dysfunction such as anosmia, blurred vision, or diplopia (10%) were also noted. A surgical approach was initially chosen for 20 patients (28%), but eventually chosen for 20 more (total 40, 57%) during the observation period (average delay to surgery, 5 days). Patients who received surgery showed significantly poorer neurological status and larger hematoma size. Totally, two patients (3%) died, but most patients (94%) had a favorable outcome scoring 5 on the Glasgow Outcome Scale. Although VEDH generally showed favorable outcomes, clinicians must be aware of a high rate of delayed neurological deterioration during the observation period, which can be fatal due to central downward herniation.
Topics: Accidents, Traffic; Glasgow Outcome Scale; Hematoma, Epidural, Cranial; Humans; Male
PubMed: 34313885
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-021-01589-z -
Archives of Pharmacal Research Jul 2021Anecdotal evidence suggests that the severity of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is...
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the severity of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is likely to be distinguished by variations in loss of smell (LOS). Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis of 45 articles that include a total of 42,120 COVID-19 patients from 17 different countries to demonstrate that severely ill or hospitalized COVID-19 patients have a lesser chance of experiencing LOS than non-severely ill or non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients (odds ratio = 0.527 [95% CI 0.373-0.744; p < 0.001] and 0.283 [95% CI 0.173-0.462; p < 0.001], respectively). We also proposed a possible mechanism underlying the association of COVID-19 severity with anosmia, which may explain why patients without sense of smell develop severe COVID-19. Variations in LOS according to the severity of COVID-19 is a global phenomenon, with few exceptions. Since severely ill patients have a lower rate of anosmia, patients without anosmia should be monitored more closely in the early stages of COVID-19, for early diagnosis of severity of illness. An understanding of how the severity of COVID-19 infection and LOS are associated has profound implications for the clinical management and mitigation strategies for the disease.
Topics: Anosmia; COVID-19; Early Diagnosis; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Male; Odorants; Olfactory Perception; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Smell
PubMed: 34302637
DOI: 10.1007/s12272-021-01344-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Olfactory dysfunction is an early and sensitive marker of COVID-19 infection. Although self-limiting in the majority of cases, when hyposmia or anosmia persists it can...
BACKGROUND
Olfactory dysfunction is an early and sensitive marker of COVID-19 infection. Although self-limiting in the majority of cases, when hyposmia or anosmia persists it can have a profound effect on quality of life. Little guidance exists on the treatment of post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction, however several strategies have been proposed from the evidence relating to the treatment of post-viral anosmia (such as medication or olfactory training).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions that have been used, or proposed, to treat persisting olfactory dysfunction due to COVID-19 infection. A secondary objective is to keep the evidence up-to-date, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register; Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 16 December 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials including participants who had symptoms of olfactory disturbance following COVID-19 infection. Only individuals who had symptoms for at least four weeks were included in this review. Studies compared any intervention with no treatment or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcomes were the recovery of sense of smell, disease-related quality of life and serious adverse effects. Secondary outcomes were the change in sense of smell, general quality of life, prevalence of parosmia and other adverse effects (including nosebleeds/bloody discharge). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one study with 18 participants, which compared the use of a 15-day course of oral steroids combined with nasal irrigation (consisting of an intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant solution) with no intervention. Psychophysical testing was used to assess olfactory function at baseline, 20 and 40 days. Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant compared to no intervention Recovery of sense of smell was assessed after 40 days (25 days after cessation of treatment) using the Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) score. This tool has a range of 0 to 100, and a score of ≥ 90 represents normal olfactory function. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of this intervention on recovery of the sense of smell at one to three months (5/9 participants in the intervention group scored ≥ 90 compared to 0/9 in the control group; risk ratio (RR) 11.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 173.66; 1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Change in sense of smell was assessed using the CCCRC score at 40 days. This study reported an improvement in sense of smell in the intervention group from baseline (median improvement in CCCRC score 60, interquartile range (IQR) 40) compared to the control group (median improvement in CCCRC score 30, IQR 25) (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events andother adverse events were not identified in any participants of this study; however, it is unclear how these outcomes were assessed and recorded (1 study; 18 participants; very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is very limited evidence available on the efficacy and harms of treatments for persistent olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection. However, we have identified other ongoing trials in this area. As this is a living systematic review we will update the data regularly, as new results become available. For this (first) version of the living review we identified only one study with a small sample size, which assessed systemic steroids and nasal irrigation (intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant). However, the evidence regarding the benefits and harms from this intervention to treat persistent post-COVID-19 olfactory dysfunction is very uncertain.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Ambroxol; Betamethasone; Bias; COVID-19; Expectorants; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Nasal Decongestants; Nasal Lavage; Olfaction Disorders; Prednisone; Prevalence; Quality of Life; Recovery of Function; Smell; Time Factors
PubMed: 34291813
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013876.pub2 -
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 -
Allergy & Rhinology (Providence, R.I.) 2021Anosmia and hyposmia have many etiologies, including trauma, chronic sinusitis, neoplasms, and respiratory viral infections such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. We aimed... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anosmia and hyposmia have many etiologies, including trauma, chronic sinusitis, neoplasms, and respiratory viral infections such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to systematically review the literature on the diagnostic evaluation of anosmia/hyposmia.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating diagnostic modalities for anosmia, written in the English language, used original data, and had two or more patients.
RESULTS
A total of 2065 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 226 abstracts were examined, yielding 27 full-text articles meeting inclusion criteria (Level of evidence ranging from 1 to 4; most level 2). The studies included a total of 13,577 patients. The most utilized diagnostic tools were orthonasal smell tests (such as the Sniffin' Sticks and the UPSIT, along with validated abridged smell tests). Though various imaging modalities (including MRI and CT) were frequently mentioned in the workup of olfactory dysfunction, routine imaging was not used to primarily diagnose smell loss.
CONCLUSION
The literature includes several studies on validity and reliability for various smell tests in diagnosing anosmia. Along with a thorough history and physical, validated orthonasal smell tests should be part of the workup of the patient with suspected olfactory dysfunction. The most widely studied modality was MRI, but criteria for the timing and sequence of imaging modalities was heterogenous.
PubMed: 34285823
DOI: 10.1177/21526567211026568 -
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