Objective To define headache characteristics and evolution in relation to COVID-19 and its inflammatory response. Methods This is a prospective study, comparing clinical data and inflammatory biomarkers of COVID-19 patients with and without headache, recruited at the Emergency Room. We compared baseline with 6-week follow-up to evaluate disease evolution. Results Of 130 patients, 74.6% (97/130) had headache. In all, 24.7% (24/97) of patients had severe pain with migraine-like features. Patients with headache had more anosmia/ageusia (54.6% vs. 18.2%; p < 0.0001). Clinical duration of COVID-19 was shorter in the headache group (23.9 ± 11.6 vs. 31.2 ± 12.0 days; p = 0.028). In the headache group, IL-6 levels were lower at the ER (22.9 (57.5) vs. 57.0 (78.6) pg/mL; p = 0.036) and more stable during hospitalisation. After 6 weeks, of 74 followed-up patients with headache, 37.8% (28/74) had ongoing headache. Of these, 50% (14/28) had no previous headache history. Headache was the prodromal symptom of COVID-19 in 21.4% (6/28) of patients with persistent headache ( p = 0.010). Conclusions Headache associated with COVID-19 is a frequent symptom, predictive of a shorter COVID-19 clinical course. Disabling headache can persist after COVID-19 resolution. Pathophysiologically, its migraine-like features may reflect an activation of the trigeminovascular system by inflammation or direct involvement of SARS-CoV-2, a hypothesis supported by concomitant anosmia.

Collateral damage may occur in epilepsy management during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to establish the impact of this pandemic on epilepsy patients in terms of patient-reported seizure control and emerging symptoms. Materials & Methods: This is a cross-sectional study including consecutive patients assessed by telephone contact in an epilepsy clinic during the first month of confinement. Demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded, and a 19-item questionnaire was systematically completed. Data regarding the impact of confinement, economic effects of the pandemic, and subjective perception of telemedicine were recorded. Additional clinical data were obtained in patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Two hundred and fifty-five patients were recruited: mean age 48.2 ± 19.8 years, 121 (47.5%) women. An increase in seizure frequency was reported by 25 (9.8%) patients. Sixty-eight (26.7%) patients reported confinement-related anxiety, 22 (8.6%) depression, 31 (12.2%) both, and 72 (28.2%) insomnia. Seventythree (28.6%) patients reported a reduction in economic income. Logistic regression analysis showed that tumor-related epilepsy etiology [OR = 7.36 (95% CI 2.17-24.96)], drug-resistant epilepsy [OR = 3.44 (95% CI 1.19-9.95)], insomnia [OR = 3.25 (95% CI 1.18-8.96)], fear of epilepsy [OR = 3.26 (95% CI 1.09-9.74)], and income reduction [OR = 3.65 (95% CI 1.21-10.95)] were associated with a higher risk of increased seizure frequency. Telemedicine was considered satisfactory by 214 (83.9%) patients. Five patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, with no changes in seizure frequency. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has effects in epilepsy patients. Patients with tumor-related, drug-resistant epilepsy, insomnia, and economic difficulties are at a higher risk of increased seizure frequency. Telemedicine represents a suitable tool in this setting.

Objective To analyze the medium‐term impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on epilepsy patients, focusing on psychological effects and seizure control. Methods Prospective follow‐up study to evaluate the medium‐term effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic on a cohort of epilepsy patients from a tertiary hospital previously surveyed during the first peak of the pandemic. Between July 1, 2020, and August 30, 2020, the patients answered an online 19‐item questionnaire, HADS, and PSIQ scales. Short‐ and medium‐term effects of the pandemic confinement and the perception of telemedicine were compared. Results 153 patients completed the questionnaire, mean ± SD age, 47.6 ± 19.3 years; 49.7% women. Depression was reported by 43 patients, significantly more prevalent than in the short‐term analysis (29.2% vs. 19.7%; p = .038). Anxiety (38.1% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.749) and insomnia (28.9% vs. 30.9%, p = .761) remained highly prevalent. Seventeen patients reported an increase in seizure frequency (11.1% vs. 9.1%, p = .515). The three factors independently associated with an increase in seizure frequency in the medium term were drug‐resistant epilepsy (odds ratio [OR] = 8.2, 95% CI 2.06–32.52), depression (OR = 6.46, 95% CI 1.80–23.11), and a reduction in income (OR = 5.47, 95% CI 1.51–19.88). A higher proportion of patients found telemedicine unsatisfactory (11.2% vs. 2.4%), and a lower percentage (44.8% vs. 56.8%) found it very satisfactory ( p = .005). Conclusions Depression rates increased significantly after the first wave. Depression, drug‐resistant epilepsy, and a reduction in family income were independent risk factors for an increased seizure frequency. Perception of telemedicine worsened, indicating need for re‐adaptation.

Introducción. La vacunación masiva contra el virus SARS-CoV-2 constituye una de las principales estrategias en la reducción de la morbimortalidad que presenta dicho virus. No obstante, a lo largo de los últimos meses, su administración también se ha relacionado con diversos efectos adversos raros, pero potencialmente graves. Caso clínico. En el presente artículo describimos el caso de un paciente que desarrolló un síndrome de Guillain-Barré y una púrpura trombocitopénica idiopática nueve días después de la vacunación con la tercera dosis contra el virus SARS-CoV-2 (Moderna), con dos dosis previas de AstraZeneca. Adicionalmente, destaca la presencia de positividad para autoanticuerpos anti-SSA/Ro60 y para anticuerpos inmunoglobulina G anti-GM1 e inmunoglobulina G anti-GM3. Conclusión. Aunque no es posible establecer una relación de causalidad entre la administración del booster de la vacuna y el desarrollo de la enfermedad, es destacable la asociación de dos procesos autoinmunes concomitantes, junto con la positividad en los autoanticuerpos anti-SSA/Ro60, lo cual se ha descrito en la bibliografía en casos de infección del virus SARS-CoV-2.