Search

Background Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting for neurosurgery are not rare. Considering the lack of literature informing the outcomes in this subset, present study was conducted to compare perioperative management and postoperative outcomes between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 neurosurgical patients. Methods After ethics committee approval, data of all patients with COVID-19 along with an equal number of age and diagnosis matched non-COVID-19 patients undergoing neurosurgery between April 2020 and January 2021 was analyzed retrospectively. Predictors of poor outcome were identified using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results During the study period, 50 COVID-19 patients (28 laboratory confirmed (group-C) and 22 clinicoradiological diagnosed [group-CR]) underwent neurosurgery and were compared with 50 matched non-COVID-19 patients. Preoperatively, clinicoradiological diagnosed COVID-19 patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (p = 0.01), lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (p Conclusions The concomitant presence of COVID-19 infection did not translate into poor outcome in patients undergoing neurosurgery. Preoperative motor-GCS predicted neurological outcome in both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 neurosurgical patients.

Background There are insufficient data about clinical outcomes in critically ill neurological patients with concomitant coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This study describes the clinical characteristics, predictors of mortality, and clinical outcomes in COVID-19-positive neurological patients managed in a dedicated COVID-19 neurointensive care unit (CNICU). Methods This single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted in critically ill neurological and neurosurgical patients with concomitant COVID-19 infection admitted to the CNICU at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru, from July to November 2020. Patients’ demographic, clinical, laboratory, imaging, treatment, and outcome data were retrieved from the manual and electronic medical records. Predictors of mortality and neurological outcome were identified using logistic regression. Results During the study period, 50 COVID-19-positive neurological patients were admitted to the CNICU. Six patients were excluded from the analysis as they were managed in the CNICU for

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to identify the number of patients requiring vasopressors beyond the first week of cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). Secondary objectives were to note the type, duration and doses of vasopressors and any association between prolonged vasopressors use and outcome. SETTING: Neurosurgical intensive care of a tertiary trauma care centre. METHODS: After Ethical approval we retrospectively collected the data of patients of isolated cervical SCI admitted to neurosurgical intensive care from January to December 2017. Vasopressor requirement for sepsis or cardiac arrest was excluded. RESULTS: Out of 80 patients analysed, 54 (67.5%) received vasopressors. The prolonged requirement of vasopressors was observed in 77.7%. Our preferred agent was dopamine (64.8%). We found out that longer requirement (in days) of high dose of dopamine was associated with higher survival (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our results describe a significant portion of cervical SCI patients need ongoing vasopressor to maintain a mean arterial pressure >65 mm of Hg beyond first week. We observed patients who required longer duration of high dose dopamine had a higher chance of survival suggesting some unknown mechanism of high dose of dopamine. This is first such observation, further studies are needed to substantiate.