Guillain‐Barré syndrome (GBS) incidence can increase during outbreaks of infectious illnesses. A few cases of GBS associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection have been reported. The aim was to identify specific clinical features of GBS associated with COVID‐19. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane were searched from 1 November 2019 to 17 May 2020 and included all papers with full text in English, Spanish, French or Italian, reporting original data of patients with GBS and COVID‐19. Data were extracted according to a predefined protocol. A total of 18 patients reported in 14 papers were included in this review. All the patients were symptomatic for COVID‐19, with cough and fever as the most frequently reported symptoms. The interval between the onset of symptoms of COVID‐19 and the first symptoms of GBS ranged from −8 to 24 days (mean 9 days; median 10 days). Most of the patients had a typical GBS clinical form predominantly with a demyelinating electrophysiological subtype. Mechanical ventilation was necessary in eight (44%) patients. Two (11%) patients died. Published cases of GBS associated with COVID‐19 report a sensorimotor, predominantly demyelinating GBS with a typical clinical presentation. Clinical features and disease course seem similar to those observed in GBS related to other etiologies. These results should be interpreted with caution since only 18 cases have been heterogeneously reported so far.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies performing sclerotherapy for treatment of venous malformations (VMs) of the face, head and neck. It is our hope that data from this study could be used to better inform providers and patients regarding the benefits and risks of percutaneous sclerotherapy for treatment of face, head and neck VMs. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from 2000–2018 for studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of percutaneous sclerotherapy of neck, face and head VMs. Two independent reviewers selected studies and abstracted data. The primary outcomes were complete and partial resolution of the VM. Data were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis. Thirty-seven studies reporting on 2,067 patients were included. The overall rate of complete cure following percutaneous sclerotherapy with any agent was 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 57.4–72.0%). Sodium tetradecyl sulfate had the lowest complete cure rate at 55.5% (95% CI, 36.1–74.9%) while pingyangmycin had the highest cure rate at 82.9% (95% CI, 71.1–94.7%). Overall patient satisfaction rates were 91.0% (95% CI, 86.1–95.9%). Overall quality of life improvement was 78.9% (95% CI, 67.0–90.8%). Overall permanent morbidity/mortality was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3–1.3%) with no cases of mortality. Our systematic review and meta-analysis of 37 studies and over 2,000 patients found that percutaneous sclerotherapy is a very safe and effective treatment modality for treatment of VMs of the head, neck and face.

Decompressive craniectomy consists of removal of piece of bone of the skull in order to reduce intracranial pressure. It is an age-old procedure, taking ancient roots from the Egyptians and Romans, passing through the experience of Berengario da Carpi, until Theodore Kocher, who was the first to systematically describe this procedure in traumatic brain injury (TBI). In the last century, many neurosurgeons have reported their experience, using different techniques of decompressive craniectomy following head trauma, with conflicting results. It is thanks to the successes and failures reported by these authors that we are now able to better understand the pathophysiology of brain swelling in head trauma and the role of decompressive craniectomy in mitigating intracranial hypertension and its impact on clinical outcome. Following a historical description, we will describe the steps that led to the conception of the recent randomized clinical trials, which have taught us that decompressive craniectomy is still a last-tier measure, and decisions to recommend it should been made not only according to clinical indications but also after consideration of patients' preferences and quality of life expectations.