Summary Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS), first chronicled by Willis in 1672 and described in more detail by Ekbom in 1945 [1], is a prevalent sensorimotor neurological disorder (5–10% in the population) with a circadian predilection for the evening and night. Characteristic clinical features also include a compelling urge to move during periods of rest, relief with movement, involuntary movements in sleep (viz., periodic leg movements of sleep), and fragmented sleep [2,3]. While the pathophysiology of RLS is unknown, dopaminergic neurotransmission and deficits in iron availability modulate expressivity [1,4–9]. GWAS have identified a polymorphism in an intronic region of the BTBD9 gene on chromosome 6 that confers substantial risk for RLS [2,3,10–12]. Here, we report that loss of the Drosophila homolog CG1826 (dBTBD9) appreciably disrupts sleep with concomitant increases in waking and motor activity. We further show that BTBD9 regulates brain dopamine levels in flies and controls iron homeostasis through the iron regulatory protein-2 (IRP2) in human cell lines. To our knowledge, this represents the first reverse genetic analyses of a “novel” or heretofore poorly understood gene implicated in an exceedingly common and complex sleep disorder and the development of an RLS animal model that closely recapitulates all disease phenotypes.

Objective: To assess the clinical utilization and performance of the FilmArray® Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) panel in a hospital setting. Background: Rapid diagnosis and treatment of central nervous system (CNS) infections are critical to reduce morbidity and mortality. The ME panel is a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved rapid multiplex PCR assay that targets 14 bacteria, viruses, and fungi. Previous studies show an overall agreement of 93–99% between the ME panel and conventional diagnostic testing. However, few studies have evaluated the clinical implementation of the ME assay, which is available for routine use at our institution. Methods: We performed a single center retrospective chart review of inpatients who underwent ME panel testing from August 2016 to May 2017. Clinical, radiologic, and laboratory data were reviewed to determine the clinical significance of results. Indication for lumbar puncture (LP), time to results of the ME panel, and duration of antimicrobial therapy were evaluated. Results: Seven hundred and five inpatients underwent ME testing, of whom 480 (68.1%) had clinical suspicion for CNS infection with 416 (59.0%) receiving empiric antimicrobial treatment for CNS infection. The median time-to-result of the ME panel was 1.5 h (IQR, 1.4–1.7). Overall agreement between the ME panel results and clinico-laboratory assessment was 98.2%. Forty-five patients tested positive by ME, of which 12 (26.6%) were determined likely to be clinically insignificant. Conclusions: Routine availability of the ME panel led to overutilization of diagnostic test ordering, as demonstrated by the fact that over one-third of ME panel tests performed were ordered for patients with little or no suspicion for CNS infection. The median time from LP to ME panel result was 1.5 h (IQR, 1.4–1.7). The ME panel's rapid turn-around time contributed to the overuse of the test. Approximately one-quarter of positive ME results were deemed clinically insignificant, though the impact of these positive results requires additional evaluation. Twenty-four and forty-eight hours after the ME panel resulted, 68 and 25% of patients started on empiric therapy remained on antibiotics, respectively. The median time from diagnosis to discontinuation and/or narrowing of antibiotic coverage was 25.6 h (IQR, 3.6–42.5). Further consideration of the appropriate indications for use of the ME panel in clinical settings is required.

A review of 15 patients who tested positive for human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) on the FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis panel revealed that the majority were unlikely to have HHV-6 encephalitis. Criteria to assist interpretation of HHV-6 positive results are presented.

Objective: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) primarily causes respiratory illness. However, neurological sequelae from novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can occur. Patients with neurological conditions may be at higher risk of developing worsening of their underlying problem. Here we document our initial experiences as neurologic consultants at a single center quaternary hospital at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This was a retrospective case series of adult patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 who required neurological evaluation in the form of a consultation or primary neurological care from March 13, 2020 to April 1, 2020. Results: Thirty-three patients (ages 17-88 years) with COVID-19 infection who required neurological or admission to a primary neurology team were included in this study. The encountered neurological problems associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection were encephalopathy (12 patients, 36.4%), seizure (9 patients, 27.2%), stroke (5 patients, 15.2%), recrudescence of prior neurological disease symptoms (4 patients, 12.1%), and neuromuscular (3 patients, 9.1%). The majority of patients who required evaluation by neurology had elevated inflammatory markers. Twenty-one (63.6%) patients were discharged from the hospital and 12 (36.4%) died from COVID-19 related complications. Conclusion: This small case series of our initial encounters with COVID-19 infection describes a range of neurological complications which are similar to presentations seen with other critical illnesses. COVID-19 infection did not change the overall management of neurological problems.