Background and purpose Recent observations linked coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) to thromboembolic complications possibly mediated by increased blood coagulability and inflammatory endothelial impairment. We aimed to define the risk of acute stroke in patients with severe and non‐severe COVID‐19. Methods We performed an observational, multicenter cohort study in four participating hospitals in Saxony, Germany to characterize consecutive patients with laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 who experienced acute stroke during hospitalization. Furthermore, we conducted a systematic review using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and bibliographies of identified papers following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines including data from observational studies of acute stroke in COVID‐19 patients. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and pooled with multicenter data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for acute stroke related to COVID‐19 severity using a random‐effects model. Between‐study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I2 statistics. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42020187194. Results Of 165 patients hospitalized for COVID‐19 (49.1% males, median age = 67 years [57–79 years], 72.1% severe or critical) included in the multicenter study, overall stroke rate was 4.2% (95% CI: 1.9–8.7). Systematic literature search identified two observational studies involving 576 patients that were eligible for meta‐analysis. Amongst 741 pooled COVID‐19 patients, overall stroke rate was 2.9% (95% CI: 1.9–4.5). Risk of acute stroke was increased for patients with severe compared to non‐severe COVID‐19 (RR = 4.18, 95% CI: 1.7–10.25; P = 0.002) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.82). Conclusions Synthesized analysis of data from our multicenter study and previously published cohorts indicates that severity of COVID‐19 is associated with an increased risk of acute stroke.

Objective: To evaluate the factors associated with false negatives in RT-qPCR in patients with mild-moderate symptoms of COVID-19. Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of nonhospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-qPCR-positive cases and 52 RT-qPCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two rapid diagnostic tests ---RDTs (Combined ---cRDT and Differentiated ---dRDT). The association between symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated by non-conditional logistic regression, with estimation of Odds Ratio. Results: A total of 110 subjects were studied, 52% of whom were women (mean age: 48.2 ± 11.0 years). There were 42.3% of negative RT-qPCRs that were positive in some RDTs. Fever over 38 • C (present in 35.5% of cases) and anosmia (present in 41.8%) were the symptoms most associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a relationship that remained statistically significant in patients with negative RT-qPCR and some positive RDT (aOR = 6.64; 95%CI = 1.33---33.13 and aOR = 19.38; 95% CI = 3.69---101.89, respectively). Conclusions: RT-qPCR is the technique of choice in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is not exempt from false negatives. Our results show that patients who present mild or moderate

Introduction: Uncontrolled arterial hypertension increases the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients treated with intravenous tPA and may lead to hematoma progression in patients with primary ICH. While arterial blood pressure (aBP) is commonly monitored using intermittent oscillometric measurements, vascular unloading based assessment (VUA) allows noninvasive continuous (beat-to-beat) aBP monitoring with a finger cuff. We hypothesized that VUA monitoring is feasible in post thrombolysis and ICH care and shows diagnostic agreement with intermittent oscillometric assessment. Methods: Consecutive patients with either AIS receiving intravenous tPA or ICH were prospectively monitored for 24 hours following the index event using VUA monitoring and contralateral oscillometric aBP measurement every 30 minutes. Bland Altman Plot and linear regression were conducted to define diagnostic agreement. Results: We enrolled 24 AIS patients (10 males, aged 74±15 years, mean±standard deviation) receiving tPA and 24 ICH patients (16 males, aged 67±16 years). Mean systolic aBP assessed via VUA was higher and mean diastolic aBP was lower compared to oscillometric assessment in the entire population (systolic: 147 ± 23 mmHg vs. 144 ± 34, p=0.004; diastolic: 75 ± 14 mmHg vs. 77 ± 20 mmHg vs, p=0.004) There was a positive association between VUA and oscillometric aBP profiles (systolic aBP: coef. 0.24, p<0.005; diastolic aBP: coef. 0.31, p<0.005; figure). However, diagnostic agreement analysis was inconclusive. (Bland Altman Plot) Conclusions: Although VUA and oscillometric aBP profiles were positively associated in our study, diagnostic agreement between the techniques was not sufficient to recommend implementation of VUA in clinical practice. Figure

Introduction: Recent studies linked coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to thromboembolic complications likely mediated by increased blood coagulability and inflammatory endothelial impairment. Objective: We aimed to assess the risk of acute stroke in patients with COVID-19 related to clinical severity of the disease. Methods: We conducted an observational multicenter cohort study in four participating hospitals in Saxony, Germany to characterize consecutive patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who experienced acute stroke during hospitalization. Furthermore, we performed a systematic review using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and bibliographies of identified articles following PRISMA guidelines including data from observational studies of acute stroke in COVID-19 patients. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers and pooled with multicenter data to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for acute stroke related to COVID-19 severity using random effects model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I 2 -statistics. PROSPERO identifier : CRD42020187194. Results: Of 165 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 (49.1% males, median age 67 [57-79], 72.1% severe or critical) included in the multicenter study, overall stroke rate was 4.2% (95%CI: 1.9-8.7). Systematic literature search identified two observational studies involving 576 patients that were eligible for meta-analysis. Among 741 pooled COVID-19 patients overall stroke rate was 2.9% (95%CI: 1.9-4.5). Risk of acute stroke was increased for patients with severe compared to non-severe COVID-19 (RR 4.12, 95%CI 1.7-10.25; p=0.002) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I 2 =0%, p=0.82). Conclusions: Synthesized analysis of data from our multicenter study and previously published cohorts demonstrate that severity of COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of acute stroke, underscoring the necessity of neurological monitoring in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.