We are in the midst of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak worldwide, but limited data are available regarding patients who undergo surgical treatment and either have positive results for COVID-19 or, soon after surgery, develop it.¹ Brescia is located in Lombardy, the region in Italy most affected by the current pandemic; it experienced its first official case on February 23, 2020.^2,3 Spedali Civili Hospital became 1 of 3 regional referral centers for major trauma, neurosurgery, and orthopedics, with a catchment area of more than 3 million people.⁴

Untimely diagnosis of intracranial hypertension may lead to delays in therapy and worsening of outcome. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) detects variations in cerebral blood flow velocity which may correlate with intracranial pressure (ICP). We investigated if intracranial hypertension can be accurately excluded through use of TCD. This was a multicenter prospective pilot study in patients with acute brain injury requiring invasive ICP (ICPi) monitoring. ICP estimated with TCD (ICPtcd) was compared with ICPi in three separate time frames: immediately before ICPi placement, immediately after ICPi placement, and 3 hours following ICPi positioning. Sensitivity and specificity, and concordance correlation coefficient between ICPi and ICPtcd were calculated. Receiver operating curve (ROC) and the area under the curve (AUC) analyses were estimated after measurement averaging over time. A total of 38 patients were enrolled, and of these 12 (31.6%) had at least one episode of intracranial hypertension. One hundred fourteen paired measurements of ICPi and ICPtcd were gathered for analysis. With dichotomized ICPi (≤20 mmHg vs >20 mmHg), the sensitivity of ICPtcd was 100%; all measurements with high ICPi (>20 mmHg) also had a high ICPtcd values. Bland-Altman plot showed an overestimation of 6.2 mmHg (95% CI 5.08–7.30 mmHg) for ICPtcd compared to ICPi. AUC was 96.0% (95% CI 89.8–100%) and the estimated best threshold was at ICPi of 24.8 mmHg corresponding to a sensitivity 100% and a specificity of 91.2%. This study provides preliminary evidence that ICPtcd may accurately exclude intracranial hypertension in patients with acute brain injury. Future studies with adequate power are needed to confirm this result.

An ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 that started in Hubei, China has resulted in massive strain on the healthcare infrastructure in Lombardy, Italy. The management of these patients is still evolving. This is a single-center observational cohort study of critically ill patients infected with COVID-19. Bedside clinicians abstracted daily patient data on history, treatment, and short-term course. We describe management and a proposed severity scale for treatment used in this hospital. 44 patients were enrolled; with incomplete information on 11. Of the 33 studied patients, 91% were male, median age 64; 88% were overweight or obese. 45% were hypertensive, 12% had been taking an ACE-inhibitor. Noninvasive ventilation was performed on 39% of patients for part or all or their ICU stay with no provider infection. Most patients received antibiotics for pneumonia. Patients also received lopinivir/ritonavir (82%), hydroxychloroquine (79%), and tocilizumab (12%) according to this treatment algorithm. Nine of 10 patients survived their ICU course and were transferred to the floor, with one dying in the ICU. ICU patients with COVID-19 frequently have hypertension. Many could be managed with noninvasive ventilation, despite the risk of aerosolization. The use of a severity scale augmented clinician management.

Background: Alternative noninvasive methods capable of excluding intracranial hypertension through use of transcranial Doppler (ICPtcd) in situations where invasive methods cannot be used or are not available would be useful during the management of acutely brain-injured patients. The objective of this study was to determine whether ICPtcd can be considered a reliable screening test compared to the reference standard method, invasive ICP monitoring (ICPi), in excluding the presence of intracranial hypertension. Methods: This was a prospective, international, multicenter, unblinded, diagnostic accuracy study comparing the index test (ICPtcd) with a reference standard (ICPi), defined as the best available method for establishing the presence or absence of the condition of interest (i.e., intracranial hypertension). Acute brain-injured patients pertaining to one of four categories: traumatic brain injury (TBI), subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) or ischemic stroke (IS) requiring ICPi monitoring, were enrolled in 16 international intensive care units. ICPi measurements (reference test) were compared to simultaneous ICPtcd measurements (index test) at three different timepoints: before, immediately after and 2 to 3 h following ICPi catheter insertion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated at three different ICPi thresholds (> 20, > 22 and > 25 mmHg) to assess ICPtcd as a bedside real-practice screening method. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis with the area under the curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the discriminative accuracy and predictive capability of ICPtcd. Results: Two hundred and sixty-two patients were recruited for final analysis. Intracranial hypertension (> 22 mmHg) occurred in 87 patients (33.2%). The total number of paired comparisons between ICPtcd and ICPi was 687. The NPV was elevated (ICP > 20 mmHg = 91.3%, > 22 mmHg = 95.6%, > 25 mmHg = 98.6%), indicating high discriminant accuracy of ICPtcd in excluding intracranial hypertension. Concordance correlation between ICPtcd and ICPi was 33.3% (95% CI 25.6–40.5%), and Bland–Altman showed a mean bias of -3.3 mmHg. The optimal ICPtcd threshold for ruling out intracranial hypertension was 20.5 mmHg, corresponding to a sensitivity of 70% (95% CI 40.7–92.6%) and a specificity of 72% (95% CI 51.9–94.0%) with an AUC of 76% (95% CI 65.6–85.5%). Conclusions and relevance: ICPtcd has a high NPV in ruling out intracranial hypertension and may be useful to clinicians in situations where invasive methods cannot be used or not available. Trial registration: NCT02322970.