Editor's Note: A Prospective Study of Neurologic Disorders in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in New York City
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Dr. Frontera et al. examined the prevalence and associated mortality of well-defined neurologic diagnoses in a prospective, multicenter, observational study of 4,491 consecutive hospitalized adults in the New York City (NYC) metropolitan area with laboratory-confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Neurologic disorders were diagnosed in 13.5% of these patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and were associated with higher in-hospital mortality and lower likelihood of discharge home. In response, Dr. Kumar et al. contrast the most common neurologic clinical diagnoses in this study (toxic/metabolic encephalopathy, stroke, seizure, and hypoxic/ischemic brain injury) with the most common imaging diagnoses in another study by Dr. Kremer et al. of patients with COVID-19 who underwent brain MRI (ischemic strokes, leptomeningeal enhancement, and encephalitis). They note that the study by Dr. Frontera et al. reported raised protein in the CSF in several of the patients, suggestive of intrathecal inflammation as may be seen with meningitis/encephalitis, although white cell counts were low. They wonder whether the low frequency of brain MRI in the study may have led to underdetection of meningitis/encephalitis. In another response, Dr. Liotta et al. note that they reported similar rates of stroke, seizure, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, encephalitis, and meningitis in their recent Chicago-based study but had higher rates of encephalopathy. They note that in their own study, they adjudicated all charts, not just those for patients receiving neurologic consultations, and used protocolized delirium assessments to identify encephalopathy. They contend that Dr. Frontera et al. may have missed several cases of encephalopathy with their methodology and suggest that excluding headache as a neurologic symptom may have limited the scope of SARS-CoV-2 neuropathogenesis. They also note the lower in-hospital mortality in their cohort, potentially related to the absence of an overwhelming case surge in Chicago compared with NYC, and emphasize the importance of public health measures against COVID-19 to help sustain health care infrastructure. Responding to these comments, the authors question whether patients in the imaging study by Dr. Kremer et al. actually met accepted diagnostic criteria for encephalitis, noting that CSF SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR (reverse transcription PCR) was negative in 20 patients and positing that some of the imaging findings could have represented postinfectious encephalitis. They also caution that many of the reported MRI findings are nonspecific and can be seen with nonencephalitic conditions, in particular hypoxic/ischemic injury, given the high frequency of acute respiratory distress syndrome and supplemental oxygen requirement among these patients. They also note that the elevated CSF protein in their own study is a nonspecific finding and highlight the need to follow rigorous standards when ascribing meningitis/encephalitis to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regarding their lower rates of encephalopathy compared with the Chicago study, the authors argue that they coded toxic-metabolic encephalopathy only in patients off sedation or after a sedation washout, whereas the Chicago study may have included patients with sedation-related delirium, which may have different outcomes than other etiologies of encephalopathy. However, they acknowledge that they may have underestimated the overall prevalence of neurologic injury in the most critically ill patients who could not be assessed off sedation, or who were unable to express other neurologic symptoms. Notwithstanding the older age of their cohort, they agree that the critical surge and strain on health care resources in NYC likely affected mortality and echo the importance of public health measures to stem such surges. This exchange demonstrates important differences that can arise in incidence or frequency estimates of different neurologic manifestations in COVID-19 based on the methodology that is followed.
Dr. Frontera et al. examined the prevalence and associated mortality of well-defined neurologic diagnoses in a prospective, multicenter, observational study of 4,491 consecutive hospitalized adults in the New York City (NYC) metropolitan area with laboratory-confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Neurologic disorders were diagnosed in 13.5% of these patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and were associated with higher in-hospital mortality and lower likelihood of discharge home. In response, Dr. Kumar et al. contrast the most common neurologic clinical diagnoses in this study (toxic/metabolic encephalopathy, stroke, seizure, and hypoxic/ischemic brain injury) with the most common imaging diagnoses in another study by Dr. Kremer et al. of patients with COVID-19 who underwent brain MRI (ischemic strokes, leptomeningeal enhancement, and encephalitis). They note that the study by Dr. Frontera et al. reported raised protein in the CSF in several of the patients, suggestive of intrathecal inflammation as may be seen with meningitis/encephalitis, although white cell counts were low. They wonder whether the low frequency of brain MRI in the study may have led to underdetection of meningitis/encephalitis. In another response, Dr. Liotta et al. note that they reported similar rates of stroke, seizure, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, encephalitis, and meningitis in their recent Chicago-based study but had higher rates of encephalopathy. They note that in their own study, they adjudicated all charts, not just those for patients receiving neurologic consultations, and used protocolized delirium assessments to identify encephalopathy. They contend that Dr. Frontera et al. may have missed several cases of encephalopathy with their methodology and suggest that excluding headache as a neurologic symptom may have limited the scope of SARS-CoV-2 neuropathogenesis. They also note the lower in-hospital mortality in their cohort, potentially related to the absence of an overwhelming case surge in Chicago compared with NYC, and emphasize the importance of public health measures against COVID-19 to help sustain health care infrastructure. Responding to these comments, the authors question whether patients in the imaging study by Dr. Kremer et al. actually met accepted diagnostic criteria for encephalitis, noting that CSF SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR (reverse transcription PCR) was negative in 20 patients and positing that some of the imaging findings could have represented postinfectious encephalitis. They also caution that many of the reported MRI findings are nonspecific and can be seen with nonencephalitic conditions, in particular hypoxic/ischemic injury, given the high frequency of acute respiratory distress syndrome and supplemental oxygen requirement among these patients. They also note that the elevated CSF protein in their own study is a nonspecific finding and highlight the need to follow rigorous standards when ascribing meningitis/encephalitis to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Regarding their lower rates of encephalopathy compared with the Chicago study, the authors argue that they coded toxic-metabolic encephalopathy only in patients off sedation or after a sedation washout, whereas the Chicago study may have included patients with sedation-related delirium, which may have different outcomes than other etiologies of encephalopathy. However, they acknowledge that they may have underestimated the overall prevalence of neurologic injury in the most critically ill patients who could not be assessed off sedation, or who were unable to express other neurologic symptoms. Notwithstanding the older age of their cohort, they agree that the critical surge and strain on health care resources in NYC likely affected mortality and echo the importance of public health measures to stem such surges. This exchange demonstrates important differences that can arise in incidence or frequency estimates of different neurologic manifestations in COVID-19 based on the methodology that is followed.
Footnotes
Author disclosures are available upon request (journal{at}neurology.org).
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
For assistance, please contact:
AAN Members (800) 879-1960 or (612) 928-6000 (International)
Non-AAN Member subscribers (800) 638-3030 or (301) 223-2300 option 3, select 1 (international)
Sign Up
Information on how to subscribe to Neurology and Neurology: Clinical Practice can be found here
Purchase
Individual access to articles is available through the Add to Cart option on the article page. Access for 1 day (from the computer you are currently using) is US$ 39.00. Pay-per-view content is for the use of the payee only, and content may not be further distributed by print or electronic means. The payee may view, download, and/or print the article for his/her personal, scholarly, research, and educational use. Distributing copies (electronic or otherwise) of the article is not allowed.
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
You May Also be Interested in
Dr. Deborah Friedman and Dr. Stacy Smith
► Watch
Related Articles
Alert Me
Recommended articles
-
Article
A Prospective Study of Neurologic Disorders in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in New York CityJennifer A. Frontera, Sakinah Sabadia, Rebecca Lalchan et al.Neurology, October 05, 2020 -
Article
Encephalopathies Associated With Severe COVID-19 Present Neurovascular Unit Alterations Without Evidence for Strong NeuroinflammationRaphael Bernard-Valnet, Sylvain Perriot, Mathieu Canales et al.Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, June 16, 2021 -
Article
Neurologic Syndromes Predict Higher In-Hospital Mortality in COVID-19Emad Nader Eskandar, David J. Altschul, Rafael de la Garza Ramos et al.Neurology, December 18, 2020 -
Review
Potential Neurologic Manifestations of COVID-19Anna S. Nordvig, Kathryn T. Fong, Joshua Z. Willey et al.Neurology: Clinical Practice, June 30, 2020