4.5 Article

Delirium in COVID-19: A case series and exploration of potential mechanisms for central nervous system involvement

期刊

GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 65, 期 -, 页码 47-53

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.05.008

关键词

COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Delirium; Encephalopathy; Akinetic mutism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Neuropsychiatric manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been described, including anosmia, ageusia, headache, paresthesia, encephalitis and encephalopathy. Little is known about the mechanisms by which the virus causes central nervous system (CNS) symptoms, and therefore little guidance is available regarding potential workup or management options. Cases: We present a series of four consecutive cases, seen by our psychiatry consultation service over a one -week period, each of which manifested delirium as a result of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome cor- onavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Discussion: The four cases highlighted here all occurred in older patients with premorbid evidence of cognitive decline. Unique features seen in multiple cases included rigidity, alogia, abulia, and elevated in flammatory markers. In all four cases, a change in mental status was the presenting symptom, and three of the four cases lacked signi ficant respiratory symptoms. In addition to discussing unique features of the cases, we discuss possible pathophysiologic explanations for COVID-19 delirium. Conclusions: Delirium should be recognized as a potential feature of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and may be the only presenting symptom. Based on the high rates of delirium demonstrated in prior studies, hospitals should consider adding mental status changes to the list of testing criteria. Further research is needed to determine if delirium in COVID-19 represents a primary encephalopathy heralding invasion of the CNS by the virus, or a secondary encephalopathy related to systemic in flammatory response or other factors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据