Neurological and Psychiatric Symptoms of COVID-19: A Narrative Review

Abstract:

Recently dubbed Long COVID or Long-Haul COVID, those recovering from the initial COVID-19 infection may maintain clinical signs for longer than two or more weeks following the initial onset of the infection. The virus can gain entry into the CNS through axonal transport mediated through the olfactory nerve or hematogenous spread and can also cross the blood–brain barrier to access the temporal lobe and the brainstem. The neurologic and neuropsychiatric symptoms associated with COVID-19 patients are becoming a highly studied area due to the increased frequency of reported cases.
Multiple hospital case series and observational studies have found a headache to be a common symptom among patients who are symptomatic with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The headache described by many of these patients is similar to new daily persistent headache (NDPH). NDPH potentially develops in response to pro-inflammatory cytokines during a persistent systemic or CNS inflammation, mostly due to the initial infection. The treatments investigated were high-dose steroids, tetracycline derivatives, onabotulinum toxin type A, and long-term multidrug regimens. Among the identified symptoms of post-COVID-19 viral illness, fatigue appears to be the most ubiquitous. High-dose vitamin C is currently a suggested therapy proposed for its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulatory properties.
The mental health consequences of this diagnosis are being identified among large portions of COVID-19 survivors. Among these consequences, cases of major depressive disorder (MDD) and anxiety are being reported and closely examined. The aim of this narrative review is to highlight the neurological and psychiatric symptoms that have been associated with Long-Haul COVID and their possible treatments.
Source: Edinoff AN, Chappidi M, Alpaugh ES, Turbeville BC, Falgoust EP, Cornett EM, Murnane KS, Kaye AM, Kaye AD. Neurological and Psychiatric Symptoms of COVID-19: A Narrative Review. Psychiatry International. 2022; 3(2):158-168. https://doi.org/10.3390/psychiatryint3020013 https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5318/3/2/13/htm (Full text)

Functional neurological disorder: new subtypes and shared mechanisms

Abstract:

Functional neurological disorder is common in neurological practice. A new approach to the positive diagnosis of this disorder focuses on recognisable patterns of genuinely experienced symptoms and signs that show variability within the same task and between different tasks over time.

Psychological stressors are common risk factors for functional neurological disorder, but are often absent.

Four entities—functional seizures, functional movement disorders, persistent perceptual postural dizziness, and functional cognitive disorder—show similarities in aetiology and pathophysiology and are variants of a disorder at the interface between neurology and psychiatry.

All four entities have distinctive features and can be diagnosed with the support of clinical neurophysiological studies and other biomarkers. The pathophysiology of functional neurological disorder includes overactivity of the limbic system, the development of an internal symptom model as part of a predictive coding framework, and dysfunction of brain networks that gives movement the sense of voluntariness.

Evidence supports tailored multidisciplinary treatment that can involve physical and psychological therapy approaches.

Source: Prof Mark Hallett, Selma Aybek, Prof Barbara A Dworetzky, Laura McWhirter, Prof Jeffrey P Staab, Prof Jon Stone.  Functional neurological disorder: new subtypes and shared mechanisms. The Lancet- Neurology 21 (6): 537-550 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(21)00422-1/fulltext 

Functional neurological disorder and other unexplained syndromes

Abstract:

Functional neurological disorder is a syndrome of medically unexplained neurological symptoms. In The Lancet Neurology, Mark Hallett and colleagues review some of the potential explanations for functional neurological disorder and the evidence that supports these explanations.

The paper by Hallett and colleagues, however, is more than a Review: it is also a territorial claim, seeking to expand the boundaries of what should be considered functional neurological disorder. The details of this claim are unlikely to be controversial to any clinician working in the field: the presentations Hallett and colleagues describe are not new, even if they do not fall within the current classifications of the disorder. But the claim is nonetheless remarkable, as even a decade ago it would have been thought to be sheer folly. A good argument could then have been made that functional neurological disorder (or conversion disorder, as it was more formally known) was the most stigmatised of all disorders, even compared with other unexplained syndromes. What would have been the point of expanding the scope of a diagnosis that patients went to such lengths to avoid?

The expansive mood in the Review by Hallett and colleagues therefore reflects a striking transformation in the status of functional neurological disorder. Functional neurological disorder has become a diagnosis that a neurologist might be comfortable to give, and that a patient might be glad to receive.

Source: Kanaan, RA . Functional neurological disorder and other unexplained syndromes. The Lancet- Neurology 21 (6):499-500. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422(22)00095-3/fulltext

NICE sets out steps NHS must take to implement ME/CFS guidelines

Abstract:

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has issued an unprecedented implementation statement setting out the practical steps needed for its updated guideline on the diagnosis and management of myalgic encephalomyelitis (or encephalopathy)/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) to be implemented by the NHS.

Such statements are only issued when a guideline is expected to have a “substantial” impact on NHS resources, and this is thought to be the first. It outlines the additional infrastructure and training that will be needed in both secondary and primary care to ensure that the updated ME/CFS guideline, published in October 2021, can be implemented.

The statement is necessary because the 2021 guideline completely reversed the original 2007 guideline recommendations that people with mild or moderate ME/CFS be treated with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET). Instead, the 2021 guideline says that CBT should be only offered to support patients to manage their symptoms and that any exercise programme should be overseen by an ME/CFS specialist team.

Many areas have no or very limited specialist ME/CFS services, meaning that services must be commissioned, specialist health professionals need to be trained to deliver these services, and GPs need training in how to care for their patients. “With no nationally commissioned service for ME/CFS in either primary or secondary care, it will be for local systems to determine how to structure their services to achieve the aims of the guideline,” said Paul Chrisp, director of the Centre for Guidelines at NICE.

The 2007 recommendations were overturned during a long and difficult guideline development process. Patient groups had long argued that the recommendations were inappropriate, ineffective, and potentially harmful, and hindered research into the disease. But health professionals raised concerns about the proposed guidelines and the process that underpinned them. Just weeks before the final guideline was due to be published three members of the development committee resigned, royal colleges and other professional bodies signalled that they would not support it, and NICE had to delay publication. The guideline was finally published after a meeting was arranged with stakeholders to iron out differences, but concerns among medical leaders persisted.

When the 2021 guideline was published, Charles Shepherd, honorary medical adviser of the ME Association, told The BMJ that the recommendations were “something that currently cannot be coped with.” After publication of the implementation statement, he said, “I think NICE have gone as far as they can. It is now up to individual clinical services to reposition what they do in order to comply with the recommendations and for commissioners to start setting up new clinical services where none currently exist—especially in Wales and Northern Ireland.

“A lot of people with ME/CFS are clearly not getting the medical care and support that they need in both primary care and secondary care, especially those who are severely affected and do not have access to any form of domiciliary service or a dedicated inpatient facility.” He added: “It would obviously be helpful if the royal colleges could also express their support for implementation of the changes, as it’s not clear whether they remain unhappy with the recommendations downgrading CBT and the removal of GET.”

The same day NICE published its implementation statement, Sajid Javid, health and social care secretary, announced the publication of research priorities for ME/CFS by Action for ME, a charity that supports people with ME.  “We are committed to funding research into this important area,” he said. Javid and his chief scientific adviser, Lucy Chappell, will co-chair an advisory board of experts on ME/CFS, including patients, to discuss what needs to happen next and liaise with the devolved nations.

“We will be developing our own delivery plan later this year and will be working with stakeholders to understand how we can improve experiences and outcomes for people with these debilitating conditions,” he said. “At the heart of the delivery plan will be two core principles. Firstly, that we do not know enough about ME/CFS, which must change if we are to improve experiences and outcomes. Secondly, we must trust and listen to those with lived experience of ME/CFS.”

The BMJ asked three royal colleges for a response to the implementation statement, but none responded before publication.

Source: Ingrid Torjesen. NICE sets out steps NHS must take to implement ME/CFS guidelines. BMJ 2022;377:o1221. https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1221

The Updated NICE Guidance Exposed the Serious Flaws in CBT and Graded Exercise Therapy Trials for ME/CFS

Abstract:

The British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recently published its updated guidelines for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). NICE concluded, after an extensive review of the literature, that graded exercise therapy (GET) is harmful and should not be used, and that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is only an adjunctive and not a curative treatment. Leading proponents of the cognitive behavioural model (CBmodel) find it difficult to accept this paradigm shift.
In, for example, an article in The Lancet, they try to argue that the new NICE guideline is based on ideology instead of science. In this article we reviewed the evidence they used to support their claims. Our analysis shows that the trials they used in support suffered from serious flaws which included badly designed control groups, relying on subjective primary outcomes in non-blinded studies, including patients in their trials who didn’t have the disease under investigation or had a self-limiting disease, selective reporting, outcome switching and making extensive endpoint changes, which created an overlap in entry and recovery criteria, using a post-hoc definition of recovery which included the severely ill, not publishing results that contradict their own conclusion, ignoring their own (objective) null effect, etc.
The flaws in these trials all created a bias in favour of the interventions. Despite all these flaws, treatments that are said to lead to recovery in reality do not lead to objective improvement. Therefore, these studies do not support the claim that CBT and GET are effective treatments. Moreover, the arguments that are used to claim that NICE was wrong, in reality, highlight the absence of evidence for the safety and efficacy of CBT and GET and strengthen the decision by NICE to drop CBT and GET as curative treatments for ME/CFS.
Source: Vink M, Vink-Niese A. The Updated NICE Guidance Exposed the Serious Flaws in CBT and Graded Exercise Therapy Trials for ME/CFS. Healthcare. 2022; 10(5):898. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050898 https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/10/5/898/htm (Full text)

Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Who Have Already Visited Some Medical Institutions: The Points of Diagnosis and Treatment

Abstract:

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a syndrome primarily presenting fatigue-based symptoms; however, the challenge is this syndrome has no diagnostic biomarkers. The diagnosis and treatment of ME/CFS require highly specialized knowledge and skills. There is no definitive therapy for ME/CFS, including Chinese herbal medicine, vitamins, and/or L-carnitine. We recognised ME/CFS-like symptom in some patients infected COVID-19 . This directed our attention towards the research progress on the new research on the mechanisms and treatment of ME/CFS.

Source: Shimomura T. [Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Who Have Already Visited Some Medical Institutions: The Points of Diagnosis and Treatment]. Brain Nerve. 2022 May;74(5):660-667. Japanese. doi: 10.11477/mf.1416202094. PMID: 35589661. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35589661/ [Article in Japanese]

Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Who Have Already Visited Some Medical Institutions: Diagnosis, Treatment and Research

Abstract:

Myalgic encephalitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is an acquired intractable disease characterized by profound fatigue, post-exertional malaise, sleep disturbance, cognitive impairment, and orthostatic intolerance, among other features. The onset often follows an infectious episode. Importantly, the various types of autonomic dysfunctions, pain, and intolerance to various stimuli in ME/CFS patients are intrinsically different from the “fatigue” of healthy individuals. In this short essay, I summarize the current diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for ME/CFS, as well as the progress in the immunological and imaging research on this intractable disease.

Source: Sato W. [Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) Who Have Already Visited Some Medical Institutions: Diagnosis, Treatment and Research]. Brain Nerve. 2022 May;74(5):652-659. Japanese. doi: 10.11477/mf.1416202093. PMID: 35589660. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35589660/ [Article in Japanese]

The impact of Micro RNA-320a serum level on severity of symptoms and cerebral processing of pain in patients with fibromyalgia

Abstract:

Objectives: The aim of this work was to explore the expression of miR-320a level in fibromyalgia patients in comparison to healthy controls, and to clarify its impact on the severity of symptoms and the cerebral processing of pain assessed by middle latency somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs).

Design: Case-control study.

Setting: Rheumatology and Neurology outpatient clinics.

Subjects: Seventy-four fibromyalgia patients and seventy-four normal healthy controls.

Methods: The included patients were subjected to detailed history taking, assessment of severity of fibromyalgia symptoms using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Revised (FIQR), assessment of pain intensity using the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI), measurement of the serum level of miR-320a in addition to of measurement peak latencies and amplitudes of middle latency SSEPs.

Results: Fibromyalgia patients had significantly higher micro-RNA-320a levels (0.907 ± 0.022) in comparison to controls (0.874 ± 0.015) (P-value < 0.001). The mean values of micro-RNA-320a levels were significantly higher in fibromyalgia patients with insomnia, chronic fatigue syndrome, persistent depressive disorder, and primary headache disorder than those without (P-value = 0.024, <0.001, 0.006, 0.036 respectively). There were statistically significant positive correlations between micro-RNA-320a levels, and disease duration, FIQR and NPSI total scores (P-value <0.001, 0.003, 0.002 respectively). There were no statistically significant correlations between micro-RNA-320a levels and middle latency SSEPs.

Discussion: Micro-RNA-320a level is significantly upregulated in fibromyalgia patient. It has a crucial impact on the severity of symptoms but not related to the cerebral processing of pain.

Source: Hussein M, Fathy W, Abdelaleem EA, Nasser M, Yehia A, Elanwar R. The impact of Micro RNA-320a serum level on severity of symptoms and cerebral processing of pain in patients with fibromyalgia. Pain Med. 2022 May 19:pnac076. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnac076. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35587745. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35587745/

Intimate partner violence and women living with episodic disabilities: a scoping review protocol

Abstract:

Background: Violence towards women with disabilities is most commonly perpetrated by current or former intimate partners and more than half of disabled women experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime. Disabilities differ by presence, type, and complexity, yet are commonly researched collectively. A more nuanced understanding of the relationship between intimate partner violence and episodic disability is required to better support women living with these concurrent challenges. The objective of this scoping review is to investigate and synthesize the literature reporting on intimate partner violence for women living with an episodic disability to identify key concepts and knowledge gaps on this topic. Ultimately, this review aims to improve health services for this stigmatized group of women with episodic disabilities.

Methods: This scoping review will consider all studies that focus on women (18 years of age or older) who have experienced intimate partner violence and have an episodic disability. Episodic disabilities will include multiple sclerosis, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, lupus, or rheumatoid arthritis. The broad review question is what is known about intimate partner violence within the context of women living with an episodic disability? Databases to be searched include MEDLINE (OVID), CINAHL, Embase, PsychInfo, and Scopus with no limits on language or time frame. Joanna Briggs Institute methodology will guide this scoping review to address the review questions outlined in the protocol. For papers that meet the inclusion criteria, data will be extracted, and findings will be presented in tables and narrative form. A PRISMA table will be included to enhance the transparency of the process. A descriptive qualitative approach to analysis will be conducted following Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis. The findings of the scoping review will be presented through a thematic narrative.

Discussion: Findings from this review will be used to identify important priorities for future research based on knowledge gaps and inform both health care practices and health and social interventions for women living with intimate partner violence and episodic disabilities.

Source: Campbell KA, Ford-Gilboe M, Stanley M, MacKinnon K. Intimate partner violence and women living with episodic disabilities: a scoping review protocol. Syst Rev. 2022 May 18;11(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s13643-022-01972-x. PMID: 35585642. https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-022-01972-x  (Full text)

Unexplained post-acute infection syndromes

Abstract:

SARS-CoV-2 is not unique in its ability to cause post-acute sequelae; certain acute infections have long been associated with an unexplained chronic disability in a minority of patients. These post-acute infection syndromes (PAISs) represent a substantial healthcare burden, but there is a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms, representing a significant blind spot in the field of medicine.

The relatively similar symptom profiles of individual PAISs, irrespective of the infectious agent, as well as the overlap of clinical features with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), suggest the potential involvement of a common etiopathogenesis.

In this Review, we summarize what is known about unexplained PAISs, provide context for post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), and delineate the need for basic biomedical research into the underlying mechanisms behind this group of enigmatic chronic illnesses.

Source: Choutka J, Jansari V, Hornig M, Iwasaki A. Unexplained post-acute infection syndromes. Nat Med. 2022 May;28(5):911-923. doi: 10.1038/s41591-022-01810-6. Epub 2022 May 18. PMID: 35585196. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01810-6 (Full text)