Background: COVID-19 has been frequently associated with an increased risk of thrombotic complications. There have also been reports of an increased likelihood of stroke, although its true incidence in patients with COVID-19 is currently unknown. Methods: Electronic databases PubMed and Scopus were searched from inception up to July 30, 2021 to identify randomized controlled studies in patients with confirmed COVID-19 undergoing one or more interventions. Studies were screened for eligibility using a predefined inclusion criterion and selected using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted, and heterogeneity was assessed using I-squared test. Results: Out of 3960 potentially eligible articles, 77 randomized studies (38 732 patients) were included. Mean age of the study population was 55±9.3 years. Females constituted 38% of the study population and mean duration of follow-up after study enrollment was 23±12.9 days. Cumulative incidence of stroke in the overall study population was 0.001 (95% CI, 0.001–0.002) with a total of 65 events in 38 732 patients, corresponding to an absolute incidence of 0.168%. Incidence of stroke in the inpatient population was 0.001 (95% CI, 0.001–0.002; 65 events in 37 069 patients), corresponding to an absolute incidence of 0.175%. No strokes were observed in the outpatient setting. Conclusions: The overall incidence of stroke in patients with COVID-19 appears to be lower than that reported in previous observational reports.

No abstract

Introduction: Computed tomography with pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is the gold standard for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE). A nearly five-fold increase in the use of CTPA was observed from 2004 to 2016 in the United States. Hypothesis: Suboptimal utilization of validated diagnostic predictive tools with D-dimer might have led to excessive use of CTPA in a large public hospital in Bronx, New York. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent CTPA from January to October 2021. Two independent reviewers, blinded to each other and to the CTPA and D-dimer results, estimated the clinical probability for PE using the Well’s criteria, YEARS criteria, and the revised Geneva score. Patients were classified based on the presence or absence of PE in the CTPA. Chi-square and Fischer's exact test were used to compare discrete variables. Results: 504 patients were included in the analysis (median age: 56 years, female: 59.1%). The clinical probability for PE was considered to be low by both independent reviewers in 303 (60.2%), 250 (49.7%), and 108 (21.5%) patients based on Well’s criteria, YEARS criteria, and the revised Geneva score, respectively. D-dimer testing was conducted in less than half of patients with low clinical probability [Well’s:(43.2%), YEARS:(49.7%), Geneva:(46.3%)]. Based on Well’s criteria, of 69/131 patients (52.7%) with a D-dimer < 500 ng/ml, 3/69 (4.3%) were diagnosed with PE. As per YEARS criteria, of 51/100 patients (51%) with a D-dimer < 500 ng/ml, 3/51 (5.9%) were diagnosed with PE. Based on the revised Geneva score, of 26/50 (52%) patients with a D-dimer of < 500 ng/ml, 1/26 (3.8%) patient was diagnosed with PE. All PEs were subsegmental. Conclusion: Many patients underwent CTPA despite having a low probability of PE due to suboptimal utilization of validated diagnostic predictive tools with D-dimer. Using a D-dimer cut-off of <500 ng/ml in patients with a low probability of PE would have missed only a small number of subsegmental PE.

No abstract