Objective: Acute encephalopathy may occur in COVID-19-infected patients. We investigated whether medically indicated EEGs performed in acutely ill patients under investigation (PUIs) for COVID-19 report epileptiform abnormalities and whether these are more prevalent in COVID-19 positive than negative patients. Methods: In this retrospective case series, adult COVID-19 inpatient PUIs underwent EEGs for acute encephalopathy and/or seizure-like events. PUIs had 8-channel headband EEGs (Ceribell; 20 COVID-19 positive, 6 COVID-19 negative); 2 more COVID-19 patients had routine EEGs. Overall, 26 Ceribell EEGs, 4 routine and 7 continuous EEG studies were reviewed. EEGs were interpreted by board-certified clinical neurophysiologists (n = 16). EEG findings were correlated with demographic data, clinical presentation and history, and medication usage. Fisher's exact test was used. Results: We included 28 COVID-19 PUIs (30-83 years old), of whom 22 tested positive (63.6% males) and 6 tested negative (33.3% male). The most common indications for EEG, among COVID-19-positive vs COVID-19-negative patients, respectively, were new onset encephalopathy (68.2% vs 33.3%) and seizure-like events (14/22, 63.6%; 2/6, 33.3%), even among patients without prior history of seizures (11/17, 64.7%; 2/6, 33.3%). Sporadic epileptiform discharges (EDs) were present in 40.9% of COVID-19-positive and 16.7% of COVID-19-negative patients; frontal sharp waves were reported in 8/9 (88.9%) of COVID-19-positive patients with EDs and in 1/1 of COVID-19-negative patient with EDs. No electrographic seizures were captured, but 19/22 COVID-19-positive and 6/6 COVID-19-negative patients were given antiseizure medications and/or sedatives before the EEG. | 315GALANOPOULOU et AL. | METHODS | Study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria

Objective Our epilepsy population recently experienced the acute effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic in New York City. Herein, we aimed to determine patient‐perceived seizure control during the surge, specific variables associated with worsened seizures, the prevalence of specific barriers to care, and patient‐perceived efficacy of epilepsy care delivered via telephone and live video visits during the pandemic. Methods We performed a cross‐sectional questionnaire study of adult epilepsy patients who had a scheduled appointment at a single urban Comprehensive Epilepsy Center (Montefiore Medical Center) between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 during the peak of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the Bronx. Subjects able to answer the questionnaire themselves in English or Spanish were eligible to complete a one‐time survey via telephone or secure online platform (REDCap). Results Of 1212 subjects screened, 675 were eligible, and 177 adequately completed the questionnaire. During the COVID‐19 pandemic, 75.1% of patients reported no change in seizure control, whereas 17.5% reported that their seizure control had worsened, and 7.3% reported improvement. Subjects who reported worsened seizure control had more frequent seizures at baseline, were more likely to identify stress and headaches/migraines as their typical seizure precipitants, and were significantly more likely to report increased stress related to the pandemic. Subjects with confirmed or suspected COVID‐19 did not report worsened seizure control. Nearly 17% of subjects reported poorer epilepsy care, and 9.6% had difficulty obtaining their antiseizure medications; these subjects were significantly more likely to report worse seizure control. Significance Of the nearly 20% of subjects who reported worsened seizure control during the COVID‐19 pandemic, stress and barriers to care appear to have posed the greatest challenge. This unprecedented pandemic exacerbated existing and created new barriers to epilepsy care, which must be addressed.

Objective:The SARS-Cov2 virus is protean in its manifestations, affecting nearly every organ system. However, nervous system involvement and its impact on disease outcome are poorly characterized. The objective of the study is to determine if neurological syndromes are associated with increased risk of inpatient mortality.Methods:581 hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-Cov2 infection, neurological involvement and brain-imaging were compared to hospitalized non-neurological COVID-19 patients. Four patterns of neurological manifestations were identified –acute stroke, new or recrudescent seizures, altered mentation with normal imaging, and neuro-COVID-19 complex. Factors present on admission were analyzed as potential predictors of in-hospital mortality, including sociodemographic variables, pre-existing comorbidities, vital-signs, laboratory values, and pattern of neurological manifestations. Significant predictors were incorporated into a disease-severity score. Patients with neurological manifestations were matched with patients of the same age and disease severity to assess the risk of death.Results:4711 patients with confirmed SARS-Cov2 infection were admitted to one medical system in New York City during a 6-week period. Of these, 581 (12%) had neurological issues of sufficient concern to warrant neuro-imaging. These patients were compared to 1743 non-neurological COVID-19 patients matched for age and disease-severity admitted during the same period. Patients with altered mentation (n=258, p =0.04, OR 1.39, CI 1.04 – 1.86) or radiologically confirmed stroke (n=55, p = 0.001, OR 3.1, CI 1.65-5.92) had a higher risk of mortality than age and severity-matched controls.Conclusions:The incidence of altered mentation or stroke on admission predicts a modest but significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality independent of disease severity. While other biomarker factors also predict mortality, measures to identify and treat such patients may be important in reducing overall mortality of COVID-19.

SummaryObjectiveTo analyze data from Seizure Tracker, a large electronic seizure diary, including comparison of seizure characteristics among different etiologies, temporal patterns in seizure fluctuations, and specific triggers.MethodsZero‐inflated negative binomial mixed‐effects models were used to evaluate temporal patterns of seizure events (during the day or week), as well as group differences in monthly seizure frequency between children and adults and between etiologies. The association of long seizures with seizure triggers was evaluated using a mixed‐effects logistic model with subject as the random effect. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and odds ratios were reported for analyses involving zero‐inflated negative binomial and logistic mixed‐effects models, respectively.ResultsA total of 1,037,909 seizures were logged by 10,186 subjects (56.7% children) from December 2007 to January 2016. Children had more frequent seizures than adults did (median monthly seizure frequency 3.5 vs. 2.7, IRR 1.26; p < 0.001). Seizures demonstrated a circadian pattern (higher frequency between 07:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. and lower overnight), and seizures were reported differentially across the week (seizure rates higher Monday through Friday than Saturday or Sunday). Longer seizures (>5 or >30 min) had a higher proportion of the following triggers when compared with shorter seizures: “Overtired or irregular sleep,” “Bright or flashing lights,” and “Emotional stress” (p < 0.004).SignificanceThis study explored a large cohort of patients with self‐reported seizures; strengths and limitations of large seizure diary databases are discussed. The findings in this study are consistent with those of prior work in smaller validated cohorts, suggesting that patient‐recorded databases are a valuable resource for epilepsy research, capable of both replication of results and generation of novel hypotheses.