Background: Comprehensive data on the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) profile in patients with COVID-19 and neurological involvement from large-scale multicenter studies are missing so far. Objective: To analyze systematically the CSF profile in COVID-19. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 150 lumbar punctures in 127 patients with PCR-proven COVID-19 and neurological symptoms seen at 17 European university centers Results: The most frequent pathological finding was blood-CSF barrier (BCB) dysfunction (median QAlb 11.4 [6.72–50.8]), which was present in 58/116 (50%) samples from patients without pre-/coexisting CNS diseases (group I). QAlb remained elevated > 14d (47.6%) and even > 30d (55.6%) after neurological onset. CSF total protein was elevated in 54/118 (45.8%) samples (median 65.35 mg/dl [45.3–240.4]) and strongly correlated with QAlb. The CSF white cell count (WCC) was increased in 14/128 (11%) samples (mostly lympho-monocytic; median 10 cells/µl, > 100 in only 4). An albuminocytological dissociation (ACD) was found in 43/115 (37.4%) samples. CSF l-lactate was increased in 26/109 (24%; median 3.04 mmol/l [2.2–4]). CSF-IgG was elevated in 50/100 (50%), but was of peripheral origin, since QIgG was normal in almost all cases, as were QIgA and QIgM. In 58/103 samples (56%) pattern 4 oligoclonal bands (OCB) compatible with systemic inflammation were present, while CSF-restricted OCB were found in only 2/103 (1.9%). SARS-CoV-2-CSF-PCR was negative in 76/76 samples. Routine CSF findings were normal in 35%. Cytokine levels were frequently elevated in the CSF (often associated with BCB dysfunction) and serum, partly remaining positive at high levels for weeks/months (939 tests). Of note, a positive SARS-CoV-2-IgG-antibody index (AI) was found in 2/19 (10.5%) patients which was associated with unusually high WCC in both of them and a strongly increased interleukin-6 (IL-6) index in one (not tested in the other). Anti-neuronal/anti-glial autoantibodies were mostly absent in the CSF and serum (1509 tests). In samples from patients with pre-/coexisting CNS disorders (group II [N = 19]; including multiple sclerosis, JC-virus-associated immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome, HSV/VZV encephalitis/meningitis, CNS lymphoma, anti-Yo syndrome, subarachnoid hemorrhage), CSF findings were mostly representative of the respective disease. Conclusions: The CSF profile in COVID-19 with neurological symptoms is mainly characterized by BCB disruption in the absence of intrathecal inflammation, compatible with cerebrospinal endotheliopathy. Persistent BCB dysfunction and elevated cytokine levels may contribute to both acute symptoms and ‘long COVID’. Direct infection of the CNS with SARS-CoV-2, if occurring at all, seems to be rare. Broad differential diagnostic considerations are recommended to avoid misinterpretation of treatable coexisting neurological disorders as complications of COVID-19.

Background: Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) comprise a broad spectrum of symptoms such as fatigue, general weakness, compromised attention and sleep or anxiety disorders. PASC represents a medical and socio-economic challenge. Objectives: Our study evaluated cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6 and TNFα) and cortisol levels in a cohort of typical patients with PASC, suffering concentration problems, fatigue and difficulties finding words. Design: This was a prospective cohort study. Four groups were analysed and compared: those who had never contracted SARS-CoV-2 ( n = 13), infected but had no PASC ( n = 34), infected with former PASC that resolved ( n = 40) and patients with ongoing PASC after infection ( n = 91). Methods: Cytokine and cortisol serum levels were determined in patients’ blood samples. Results: Cytokine levels of IL-1β, IL-6, TNFα and cortisol levels did not differ between groups analysed. Conclusion: This may indicate a non-organic/psychosomatic genesis of PASC; further studies are needed to elucidate the underlying causes of PACS, and non-organic causes should not be overlooked.

Background: A growing number of reports suggest that infection with SARS-CoV-2 often leads to neurological involvement; however, data on the incidence and severity are limited to mainly case reports and retrospective studies. Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional study of 102 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients investigated the frequency, type, severity and risk factors as well as underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of neurological involvement (NIV) in COVID-19 patients. Results: Across the cohort, 59.8% of patients had NIV. Unspecific NIV was suffered by 24.5%, mainly general weakness and cognitive decline or delirium. Mild NIV was found in 9.8%; most commonly, impaired taste or smell. Severe NIV was present in 23.5%; half of these suffered cerebral ischaemia. Incidence of NIV increased with respiratory symptoms of COVID-19. Mortality was higher with increasing NIV severity. Notably, 83.3% with severe NIV had a pre-existing neurological co-morbidity. All cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody quotient did not suggest intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of the patients with severe NIV, 50% had blood–brain barrier (BBB) disruption and showed a trend of elevated interleukin levels in CSF. Antibodies against neuronal and glial epitopes were detected in 35% of the patients tested. Conclusion: Cerebrovascular events were the most frequent severe NIV and severe NIV was associated with high mortality. Incidence of NIV increased with respiratory symptoms and NIV and pre-existing neurological morbidities were independent risk factors for fatality. Inflammatory involvement due to BBB disruption and cytokine release drives NIV, rather than direct viral invasion. These findings might help physicians define a further patient group requiring particular attention during the pandemic.

To describe the heterogeneity of electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies in Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) patients collected as part of the International GBS Outcome Study (IGOS). Prospectively collected clinical and EDx data were available in 957 IGOS patients from 115 centers. Only the first EDx study was included in the current analysis. Median timing of the EDx study was 7 days (interquartile range 4-11) from symptom onset. Methodology varied between centers, countries and regions. Reference values from the responding 103 centers were derived locally in 49%, from publications in 37% and from a combination of these in the remaining 15%. Amplitude measurement in the EDx studies (baseline-to-peak or peak-to-peak) differed from the way this was done in the reference values, in 22% of motor and 39% of sensory conduction. There was marked variability in both motor and sensory reference values, although only a few outliers accounted for this. Our study showed extensive variation in the clinical practice of EDx in GBS patients among IGOS centers across the regions. Besides EDx variation in GBS patients participating in IGOS, this diversity is likely to be present in other neuromuscular disorders and centers. This underlines the need for standardization of EDx in future multinational GBS studies.