COVID-19 and neurointerventional service worldwide: a survey of the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT), the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS), the Sociedad Iberolatinoamericana de Neuroradiologia Diagnostica y Terapeutica (SILAN), the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology (SVIN), and the World Federation of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology (WFITN).
intervention
political
standards
stroke
thrombectomy
Journal
Journal of neurointerventional surgery
ISSN: 1759-8486
Titre abrégé: J Neurointerv Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101517079
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
received:
12
05
2020
revised:
04
06
2020
accepted:
05
06
2020
pubmed:
18
6
2020
medline:
21
7
2020
entrez:
18
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This survey was focused on the provision of neurointerventional services, the current practices of managing patients under COVID-19 conditions, and the expectations for the future. Invitations for this survey were sent out as a collaborative effort of the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT), the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS), the Sociedad Iberolatinoamericana de Neuroradiologia Diagnostica y Terapeutica (SILAN), the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology (SVIN), and the World Federation of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology (WFITN). Overall, 475 participants from 61 countries responded (six from Africa (1%), 81 from Asia (17%), 156 from Europe (33%), 53 from Latin America (11%), and 172 from North America (11%)). The majority of participants (96%) reported being able to provide emergency services, though 26% of these reported limited resources. A decrease in emergency procedures was reported by 69% of participants (52% in ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, 11% ischemic, and 6% hemorrhagic stroke alone). Only 4% reported an increase in emergency cases. The emerging need for social distancing and the rapid adoption of remote communication was reflected in the interest in establishing case discussion forums (43%), general online forums (37%), and access to angio video streaming for live mentoring and support (33%). Neurointerventional emergency services are available in almost all centers, while the number of emergency patients is markedly decreased. Half of the participants have abandoned neurointerventions in non-emergent situations. There are considerable variations in the management of neurointerventions and in the expectations for the future.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This survey was focused on the provision of neurointerventional services, the current practices of managing patients under COVID-19 conditions, and the expectations for the future.
METHODS
METHODS
Invitations for this survey were sent out as a collaborative effort of the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT), the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS), the Sociedad Iberolatinoamericana de Neuroradiologia Diagnostica y Terapeutica (SILAN), the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology (SVIN), and the World Federation of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology (WFITN).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, 475 participants from 61 countries responded (six from Africa (1%), 81 from Asia (17%), 156 from Europe (33%), 53 from Latin America (11%), and 172 from North America (11%)). The majority of participants (96%) reported being able to provide emergency services, though 26% of these reported limited resources. A decrease in emergency procedures was reported by 69% of participants (52% in ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, 11% ischemic, and 6% hemorrhagic stroke alone). Only 4% reported an increase in emergency cases. The emerging need for social distancing and the rapid adoption of remote communication was reflected in the interest in establishing case discussion forums (43%), general online forums (37%), and access to angio video streaming for live mentoring and support (33%).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Neurointerventional emergency services are available in almost all centers, while the number of emergency patients is markedly decreased. Half of the participants have abandoned neurointerventions in non-emergent situations. There are considerable variations in the management of neurointerventions and in the expectations for the future.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32546635
pii: neurintsurg-2020-016349
doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016349
pmc: PMC7316120
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
726-730Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: Consultancy: Acandis, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cerenovus, Medtronic, Microvention, Stryker, CD: Proctor Medtronic. DL: Consultant to Cerenovus, Genentech, Stryker, Medtronic as Imaging Core Lab. WJ: Consultancy: Rebound Therapeutics, Integra, Viseon, Imperative Care, Medtronic, Q’Apel, Stream Biomedical, Spartan Micro; Investor: Cerebrotech, Endostream, Viseon, Rebound, and Spartan Micro, JMM: Disclosures are: Penumbra: speaker’s bureau, Stryker: Consultant.
Références
Clin Neuroradiol. 2019 Dec 20;:
pubmed: 31863121
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2020 Apr;41(4):552-554
pubmed: 32198164
Neurol Sci. 2020 May;41(5):1003-1005
pubmed: 32270359
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 14;382(20):e60
pubmed: 32343504
J Neurointerv Surg. 2020 Jun;12(6):542-544
pubmed: 32303584
Stroke. 2020 Jun;51(6):1896-1901
pubmed: 32347790
J Neurointerv Surg. 2020 Jun;12(6):539-541
pubmed: 32295835
J Neurosurg. 2020 Apr 17;:1-2
pubmed: 32302990
JAMA. 2020 Feb 7;:
pubmed: 32031570