Much has been written regarding the potential clinical significance of myocardial bridges. As such bridging is often seen in normal individuals, it is clear that not all arteries bridged by myocardial segments produce clinical symptoms thereby suggesting that this feature may simply be an anatomical variant. However, some authors who have considered these bridges as the cause of cardiac ischemia have suggested two potential mechanisms for their pathophysiology. The first is a phasic systolic compression of the bridged segment with persistent mid-to-late diastolic reduction in arterial diameter and the second proposes a reduction in arterial flow. Both mechanisms may contribute to a reduced reserve in coronary blood flow. In this review, we discuss the evidence that exists regarding myocardial bridging and the potential for bridging to cause myocardial ischemia.
Introduction: Multiple risk factors of mortality have been identified in patients with COVID-19. Here, we sought to determine the effect of a history of neurological disorder and development of neurological manifestations on mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Methods: From March 20 to May 20, 2020, hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 were identified at four hospitals in Ohio. Previous history of neurological disease was classified by severity (major or minor). Neurological manifestations during disease course were also grouped into major and minor manifestations. Encephalopathy, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and seizures were defined as major manifestations, whereas minor neurological manifestations included headache, anosmia, dysgeusia, dizziness or vertigo, and myalgias. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine significant predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19 infection.Results: 574/626 hospitalized patients were eligible for inclusion. Mean age of the 574 patients included in the analysis was 62.8 (SD 17.6), with 298 (51.9%) women. Of the cohort, 240(41.8%) patients had a prior history of neurological disease (HND), of which 204 (35.5%) had a major history of neurological disease (HND). Mortality rates were higher in patients with a major HND (30.9 vs. 15.4%; p = 0.00002), although this was not a significant predictor of death. Major neurological manifestations were recorded in 203/574 (35.4%) patients during disease course. The mortality rate in patients who had major neurological manifestations was 37.4% compared to 11.9% (p = 2 × 10 −12 ) in those who did not. In multivariate analysis, major neurological manifestation (OR 2.1,; p = 0.002) was a predictor of death. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, history of pre-existing neurological disease in hospitalized COVID-19 patients did not impact mortality; however, development of major neurological manifestations during disease course was found to be an independent predictor of death. Larger studies are needed to validate our findings.
Considering the COVID-19 pandemic where concomitant occurrence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and severe acute brain injury (sABI) has increasingly co-emerged, we synthesize existing data regarding the simultaneous management of both conditions. Our aim is to provide readers with fundamental principles and concepts for the management of sABI and ARDS, and highlight challenges and conflicts encountered while managing concurrent disease. Up to 40 percent of patients with sABI can develop ARDS. While there are trials and guidelines to support the mainstays of treatment for ARDS and sABI independently, guidance on concomitant management is limited. Treatment strategies aimed at managing severe ARDS may at times conflict with the management of sABI. In this narrative review, we discuss the physiological basis and risks involved during simultaneous management of ARDS and sABI, summarize evidence for treatment decisions, and demonstrate these principles using hypothetical case scenarios. Use of invasive or non-invasive monitoring to assess brain and lung physiology may facilitate goal-directed treatment strategies with the potential to improve outcome. Understanding the pathophysiology and key treatment concepts for co-management of these conditions is critical to optimizing care in this high-acuity patient population.
Purpose of review To summarize recent changes in management and emerging therapies for pregnant neurocritical care patients. Recent findings Diagnostic and treatment options for managing neurologic emergencies in pregnant patients have expanded with both greater understanding of the effects of imaging modalities and medications on pregnancy and application of standard treatments for non-pregnant patients to pregnant populations. Specifically, this includes cerebrovascular diseases (pregnancy-associated ischemic stroke, pregnancy-associated intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis), post-maternal cardiac arrest care, seizures and status epilepticus, myasthenia gravis, and fetal somatic support in maternal death by neurologic criteria. Summary With the exception of direct abdominal computed tomography (CT), most imaging studies are reasonably safe in pregnancy. When emergent imaging is needed to prevent maternal morbidity or mortality, any CT sequence with or without contrast is appropriate to pursue. Though new safety data on antiplatelets, antihypertensives, thrombolytics, and antiepileptic drugs have increased options for disease management in pregnancy, unfractionated and low-molecular weight heparin remain the safest options for anticoagulation. Early studies on hypothermia, ketamine, and immunomodulating therapies in pregnancy are promising. In myasthenia gravis, new data on adjunct devices may allow more patients to undergo safe vaginal delivery, avoiding cesarean section and the associated risk of crisis. When difficult decisions regarding preterm delivery arise, recent outcome studies can help inform discussion. Lastly, when the feared complication of maternal death by neurologic criteria occurs, fetal somatic support may help to save at least one life.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.