Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5221_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
21 Мб
Скачать
 Infectious Disease and Neurocognition
DEMERS, H. L., HE, S., PANDIT, S. G., HANNAH, E. E., ZHANG, Z., YAN, F., GREEN, H. R.,
REYES, D. F., HAU, D., MCLARTY, M. E., ALTAMURA, L., TAYLOR- HOWELL, C., GATES-
HOLLINGSWORTH, M. A., QIU, X. & AUCOIN, D. P. 2020. Development of an antigen detection
assay for early point- of- care diagnosis of Zaire ebolavirus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis, 14, e0008817. FELDMANN, H. & GEISBERT, T. W. 2011. Ebola haemorrhagic fever. Lancet, 377, 849– 862. FICENEC, S. C., SCHIEFFELIN, J. S. & EMMETT, S. D. 2019. A review of hearing loss associated with
Zika, Ebola, and Lassa fever. Am J Trop Med Hyg, 101, 484– 490. HOENEN, T., GROSETH, A. & FELDMANN, H. 2019. erapeutic strategies to target the Ebola virus
life cycle. Nat Rev Microbiol, 17, 593– 606. HOWLETT, P., BROWN, C., HELDERMAN, T., BROOKS, T., LISK, D., DEEN, G., SOLBRIG, M. &
LADO, M. 2016. Ebola virus disease complicated by late- onset encephalitis and polyarthritis, Sierra
Leone. Emerg Infect Dis, 22, 150– 152. JACOBS, M., RODGER, A., BELL, D. J., BHAGANI, S., CROPLEY, I., FILIPE, A., GIFFORD, R. J.,
HOPKINS, S., HUGHES, J., JABEEN, F., JOHANNESSEN, I., KARAGEORGOPOULOS, D.,
LACKENBY, A., LESTER, R., LIU, R. S., MACCONNACHIE, A., MAHUNGU, T., MARTIN, D.,
MARSHALL, N., MEPHAM, S., ORTON, R., PALMARINI, M., PATEL, M., PERRY, C., PETERS, S.
E., PORTER, D., RITCHIE, D., RITCHIE, N. D., SEATON, R. A., SREENU, V. B., TEMPLETON, K.,
WARREN, S., WILKIE, G. S., ZAMBON, M., GOPAL, R. & THOMSON, E. C. 2016. Late Ebola virus
relapse causing meningoencephalitis: A case report. Lancet, 388, 498– 503. JAIN, S., KHAIBOULLINA, S. F. & BARANWAL, M. 2020. Immunological perspective for Ebola virus
infection and various treatment measures taken to ght the disease. Pathogens, 9, 850. KAKOOZA- MWESIGE, A., MOHAMMED, A. H., KRISTENSSON, K., JULIANO, S. L. &
LUTWAMA, J. J. 2018. Emerging viral infections in sub- Saharan Africa and the developing nervous
system: A mini review. Front Neurol, 9, 82. KALONGI, Y., MWANZA, K., TSHISUAKA, M., LUSIAMA, N., NTANDO, E., KANZAKE, L.,
SHIEH, W. J., ZAKI, S. R., LLOYD, E. S., KSIAZEK, T. G. & ROLLIN, P. E. 1999. Isolated case of
Ebola hemorrhagic fever with mucormycosis complications, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the
Congo. J Infect Dis, 179 Suppl 1, S15– S17. KEITA, M. M., TAVERNE, B., SY SAVANÉ, S., MARCH, L., DOUKOURE, M., SOW, M. S., TOURÉ,
A., ETARD, J. F., BARRY, M. & DELAPORTE, E. 2017. Depressive symptoms among survivors
of Ebola virus disease in Conakry (Guinea): Preliminary results of the PostEboGui cohort. BMC
Psychiatry, 17, 127. KELLER, G. B., BONHOEFFER, T. & HUBENER, M. 2012. Sensorimotor mismatch signals in primary
visual cortex of the behaving mouse. Neuron, 74, 809– 815. KELLY, J. D., WORDEN, L., WANNIER, S. R., HOFF, N. A., MUKADI, P., SINAI, C., ACKLEY, S.,
CHEN, X., GAO, D., SELO, B., MOSSOKO, M., OKITOLONDA- WEMAKOY, E., RICHARDSON,
E. T., RUTHERFORD, G. W., LIETMAN, T. M., MUYEMBE- TAMFUM, J. J., RIMOIN, A. W. &
PORCO, T. C. 2019. Projections of Ebola outbreak size and duration with and without vaccine use in
Équateur, Democratic Republic of Congo, as of May 27, 2018. PLoS One, 14, e0213190. KERPER, M. & PUCKETT, Y. 2023. Filovirus [Online]. StatPearls Publishing. Available: https:// www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ books/ NBK544 258/ LEE, H. N., MCWILLIAMS, I. L., LEWKOWICZ, A. P., ENGEL, K., IRELAND, D. D. C., KELLEY-
BAKER, L., THACKER, S., PICCARDO, P., MANANGEESWARAN, M. & VERTHELYI, D. 2021.
Characterization of the therapeutic eect of antibodies targeting the Ebola glycoprotein using a novel
BSL2- compliant rVSVDeltaG- EBOV- GP infection model. Emerg Microbes Infect, 10, 2076– 2089. LEFEBVRE, A., FIET, C., BELPOIS- DUCHAMP, C., TIV, M., ASTRUC, K. & AHO GLELE, L. S. 2014.
Case fatality rates of Ebola virus diseases: A meta- analysis of World Health Organization data. Med
Mal Infect, 44, 412– 416. LEROY, E., BAIZE, S. & GONZALEZ, J. P. 2011. [Ebola and Marburg hemorrhagic fever viruses: Update
on loviruses]. Med Trop (Mars), 71, 111– 121. LIU, W. J., SESAY, F. R., COURSIER, A., KNUST, B., MARRINAN, J. E., WHITMER, S., MCDONALD,
S. L. R., GAILLARD, P., LIU, Y., SU, Q., ZHANG, Y., CROZIER, I., ARIYARAJAH, A., CARINO,
M., MASSAQUOI, T., BROUTET, N., XU, W., WU, G., STRÖHER, U., GAO, G. F., FORMENTY, P.,
SAHR, F., DEEN, G. F. & SIERRA LEONE EBOLA VIRUS PERSISTENCE STUDY GROUP. 2019.
NeuroEbola 49
Comprehensive clinical and laboratory follow- up of a female patient with Ebola virus disease: Sierra Leone Ebola Virus Persistence Study. Open Forum Infect Dis, 6, ofz068.
LIU, Z., LIU, Q., WANG, H. & YAO, X. 2024. Severe zoonotic viruses carried by dierent species of bats
and their regional distribution. Clin Microbiol Infect, 30, 206– 210.
MEDLEY, A. M., MAVILA, O., MAKUMBI, I., NIZEYEMANA, F., UMUTONI, A., BALISANGA,
H., MANOAH, Y. K., GEISSLER, A., BUNGA, S., MACDONALD, G., HOMSY, J., OJWANG, J., EWETOLA, R., RAGHUNATHAN, P. L., MACGURN, A., SINGLER, K., WARD, S., ROOHI, S., BROWN, V., SHOEMAKER, T., LAKO, R., KABEJA, A., MURUTA, A., LUBULA, L. & MERRILL, R. 2020. Case denitions used during the rst 6 months of the 10th Ebola virus disease outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo— Four neighboring countries, August 2018– February 2019.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 69, 14– 19. MÜHLBERGER, E. 2007. Filovirus replication and transcription. Future Virol, 2, 205– 215. NICASTRI, E., BALESTRA, P., RICOTTINI, M., PETROSILLO, N., DI CARO, A., CAPOBIANCHI, M.
R., GIANCOLA, M. L., IPPOLITO, G. & INMI’S EBOLA TEAM. 2016. Temporary neurocognitive
impairment with Ebola virus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 87, 1386– 1387. SAGUI, E., JANVIER, F., BAIZE, S., FOISSAUD, V., KOULIBALY, F., SAVINI, H., MAUGEY, N.,
ALETTI, M., GRANIER, H. & CARMOI, T. 2015. Severe Ebola virus infection with encephalop-
athy: Evidence for direct virus involvement. Clin Infect Dis, 61, 1627– 1628. SHANTHA, J. G., CROZIER, I., HAYEK, B. R., BRUCE, B. B., GARGU, C., BROWN, J., FANKHAUSER,
J. & YEH, S. 2017. Ophthalmic manifestations and causes of vision impairment in Ebola virus di-
sease survivors in Monrovia, Liberia. Ophthalmology, 124, 170– 177. STEPTOE, P. J., SCOTT, J. T., BAXTER, J. M., PARKES, C. K., DWIVEDI, R., CZANNER, G., VANDY,
M. J., MOMORIE, F., FORNAH, A. D., KOMBA, P., RICHARDS, J., SAHR, F., BEARE, N. A. V. &
SEMPLE, M. G. 2017a. Novel retinal lesion in Ebola survivors, Sierra Leone, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis,
23, 1102– 1109. STEPTOE, P. J., SCOTT, J. T., HARDING, S. P., BEARE, N. A. V., SEMPLE, M. G., VANDY, M. J.
& SAHR, F. 2017b. Ocular complications in survivors of the Ebola outbreak in Guinea. Am J
Ophthalmol, 181, 180. TAKADA, A., WATANABE, S., OKAZAKI, K., KIDA, H. & KAWAOKA, Y. 2001. Infectivity- enhancing
antibodies to Ebola Virus glycoprotein. J Virol, 75, 2324– 2330. TSHALA- KATUMBAY, D. D., KOMBI, M. J. & BOIVIN, M. J. 2023. Unpublished data. WONG, G., KOBINGER, G. P. & QIU, X. 2014. Characterization of host immune responses in Ebola
virus infections. Expert Rev Clin Immunol, 10, 781– 790. ZENG, X., BLANCETT, C. D., KOISTINEN, K. A., SCHELLHASE, C. W., BEARSS, J. J.,
RADOSHITZKY, S. R., HONNOLD, S. P., CHANCE, T. B., WARREN, T. K., FROUDE, J. W.,
CASHMAN, K. A., DYE, J. M., BAVARI, S., PALACIOS, G., KUHN, J. H. & SUN, M. G. 2017.
Identication and pathological characterization of persistent asymptomatic Ebola virus infection in
rhesus monkeys. Nat Microbiol, 2, 17113.
4
Neurocognitive, Neuropsychiatric, and
Neurological Aspects of Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2
(SARS- CoV- 2, Covid- 19)
Stuti Chakraborty
Introduction
Coronaviruses are a diverse group of highly pathogenic, single- stranded ribonu­cleic acid (RNA) viruses. ey are known to infect animals but also cause mild to severe respiratory illness in humans. Human coronaviruses are named aer the crown- like spike appearances on their surface and have four main subgroups: alpha, beta, gamma, and delta (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023b). e novel coronavirus (betacoronavirus) severe acute respiratory syndrome corona­virus 2 (SARS- CoV- 2, Covid- 19) has a genomic sequence that is 79 percent iden­tical with the SARS coronavirus (SARS- CoV) and with the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS- CoV). It also shares genome organization with other betacoronaviruses (Lu et al., 2020). Phylogenetic whole genome analysis revealed that the Covid- 19 and SARS- related coronaviruses identied in bats are clustered, placing Covid-19 in the Sarbecovirus subgenus of the genus Betacoronavirus. e majority of the proteins encoded by Covid- 19 are similar in length to the proteins encoded by SARS- CoV. In addition, Covid- 19 has more than 90 percent amino acid identity with the SARS- CoV (Chan et al., 2020). Toward the end of December 2019, health facilities in Wuhan, Hubei province, China started observing and re­porting patient clusters with pneumonia and respiratory virus- related symptoms of unknown cause, which subsequently led to the discovery of a previously un­known betacoronavirus (Zhu et al., 2021). e symptoms replicated those seen in viral pneumonia and included cough, fever, and chest congestion and discomfort. Similar outbreaks had been observed in 2002 and 2012 caused by SARS- CoV and MERS CoV, respectively, both of which were highly transmissible and of zoonotic origin (Cui et al., 2019). However, Covid- 19 was reported to be even more transmit­table and capable of rapid spread. By early 2020, Covid- 19 had spread worldwide,
Stuti Chakraborty, (SARS- CoV- 2, Covid- 19) In:
Covid-19 51
infecting a greater number of people than the MERS- CoV or SARS- CoV (J. T. Wu et al., 2020). In March 2020, the Director- General of the World Health Organization formally declared Covid- 19 a global pandemic (World Health Organization, 2020).
As of August 2, 2023, 768,983,095 conrmed cases of Covid- 19 infection had
been reported, with over 6.9 million deaths worldwide (World Health Organization,
2023). According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, mortality rates have been highest in the age group over 85 years across both sexes (3,380,944), fol­lowed by ages 75– 84 years (2,918,149) and 65– 74 years (2,416,198) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023a).
Early neurological manifestations of central nervous system damage caused by Covid- 19
Although Covid- 19 is primarily classied as a type of severe respiratory illness, more than two- thirds of patients hospitalized with the disease have suered from damage to the central nervous system (CNS) in addition to respiratory symptoms (Lahiri & Ardila, 2020). CNS damage associated with Covid- 19 is oen ischemic, with cases of hemorrhagic and encephalitic damage also recorded (Bodro et al., 2021). A possible pathological route of entry from early data suggested inammatory impacts on CNS vasculature via nasal mucosa and olfactory bers and spread through hematogenous routes, infecting pericytes, neurons, and endothelial cells (Bauer et al., 2022; Hu et al., 2021). Multiple reports of Covid- 19 impacting the brain and causing neurolog­ical disruption were recorded during the early emergence of the disease. Evidence of microstructural damage in the brain, seen on neuroradiological investigation with diusion tensor imaging and T1- weighted magnetic resonance sequences, in­dicated higher gray matter volumes and reduced diusivity in white matter, which specically correlated with brain regions involved in memory and olfaction. is demonstrated potential long- term neurological consequences in patients aer re­covering from the disease (Lu et al., 2020). e most frequently reported forms of CNS damage associated with Covid- 19 include acute cerebrovascular disease pre­senting as ischemic strokes, intracerebral or intracranial haemorrhage, encephalitis (causing damage to the brainstem), Guillain– Barré syndrome, CNS vasculitis (men­ingitis, myelitis), and other forms of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis associ­ated with SARS- CoV- 2 infection and other acute neuropathies (Ellul et al., 2020). In addition, increased gliosis possibly from inammation or other types of damage has been reported in the dorsal putamen and ventral striatum aer mild or moderate Covid- 19 infection (Braga et al., 2023). Other peripheral nervous system manifest­ations reported include anosmia, ageusia, and skeletal system involvement causing myalgia or myasthenia gravis (Ousseiran et al., 2023). A recent prospective multisite observational study assessing 158,267 adults found that among neurological compli­cations aer Covid- 19, the prevalence of stroke increased with increasing age; how­ever, a rapid decline over the duration of the pandemic (between 2020 and 2023) was
 Infectious Disease and Neurocognition
observed in the number of stroke diagnoses (Cho et al., 2023). Risk of CNS infec­tions and seizures were commonly noted in children and observed to be decreasing with increase in age (Cho et al., 2023).
Pathophysiology
In addition to neurological manifestations, evidence of psychiatric and cognitive in­volvement has also been recorded in Covid- 19. Some of these have included non­specic encephalopathy (confusion, disorientation, headaches without known cause) (Mao et al., 2020), altered mental state (psychosis and other neurocognitive changes), and the so- called dysexecutive syndrome characterized by disorientation, lack of attention or inattention, and poorly organized movements in response to commands (Helms et al., 2020).
e pathophysiology of Covid- 19 has been attributed to two major factors: damage to the CNS by direct neurotoxicity or due to activation of the host immune re­sponse (Desforges et al., 2019). Covid- 19 damages the nervous system by entering the human body via blood circulation, neuronal pathways, or by binding to the angiotensin- converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, leading to hypoxic insult. e role of ACE2 is to regulate normal function of the brain by stimulating brain- derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). BDNF is essential in the reduction of microglial ac­tivation and neuronal inammation, and low levels of BDNF have been associated with cognitive dysfunction (S. Y. Wu et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2014). Entry through the sensory and motor neuronal pathways is common because coronaviruses are neurotropic in nature, which allows them to escape host immune responses and thus achieve latency.
e role of ACE2 and the neuronal pathway via the olfactory nerve have been identied as the two primary pathophysiological mechanisms causing cognitive and neuropsychiatric complications in Covid- 19. e olfactory nerves and bulb, pre­sent in the nasal cavity and forebrain, are attacked by coronaviruses entering the respiratory tract, reaching the ACE2 enzymes in respiratory epithelial cells. Once inside the forebrain, the virus can cross the blood– brain barrier and cerebrospinal uid, causing inammation. Such inammation can result in demyelination and spread throughout the blood– brain barrier and cerebrospinal uid in under 7 days (Bohmwald et al., 2018; Mirfazeli et al., 2020; Pantelis et al., 2021). Coronaviruses interact with ACE2 receptors in two major ways: (1) by directly binding to ACE2 re­ceptors in the epithelial cells of the respiratory system causing a cytokine storm and widespread inammation and (2) disrupting the role of ACE2 in regulating blood pressure. e course of Covid- 19 infection has shown elevation in key cytokines like interleukin 1 beta, interleukin 6, and tumor necrosis factor alpha, among others (Poduri et al., 2020; Ye et al., 2020). is can lead to conditions of multiple organ failure and immune- mediated encephalopathy showing symptoms of seizure, de­lirium, and other neuropsychiatric disorders because of neuroinammation (Otani
Covid-19 53
et al., 2019). Neuroinammation leading to hypercoagulable states coupled with an increase in blood pressure can cause the ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes com­monly seen in Covid- 19 infection (Fotuhi et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2021; Miners et al., 2020). Covid- 19- infected patients also oen experience hypoxic states (hy­poxic encephalopathy) resulting from respiratory distress (acute respiratory dis­tress syndrome), caused by lung injury (Grasselli et al., 2020; Guo et al., 2020). Respiratory failure leads to hypoxic states in the brain— prolonged and contin­uing periods of hypoxia can cause irreversible damage to neurons, death of oligo­dendrocytes (myelinating cells fostering neuronal communication), and disruption of the blood– brain barrier (Fernando et al., 2006; Moskowitz et al., 2010; Yang & Rosenberg, 2011). Postmortem and autopsy studies have shown evidence of neu­ronal damage in brain regions associated with cognitive functions such as in the hip­pocampus and neocortex (Chen et al., 2022; Kantonen et al., 2020; Reichard et al., 2020; Solomon et al., 2020).
Several studies have suggested that the Covid- 19 virus infects human neurons, microglia (resident macrophage neuroimmune cells that perform pivotal brain function in homeostasis), and astrocytes (essential constituents of the neurovascular unit, providing a link between neurons and blood vessels). Responding to attack by infectious agents, microglia increase in number and migrate to the primary infec­tion site, acquiring an activated phagocytic phenotype (De Sousa et al., 2021; Frost et al., 2019). Microglia have been found to contribute to memory impairments in mouse models of viral infections in the CNS by attacking and actively eliminating synaptic connections (Vasek et al., 2016). In homeostasis, astrocytes provide sup­port and maintenance to the blood– brain barrier and neuronal connections. Under infectious conditions, astrocytes undergo changes in morphology, function, and molecular composition, which can lead to damaging eects. In a mouse model, researchers found that activation of microglia in the hippocampus inhibited neu­rogenesis, leading to impaired formation of memory (Venkataramani & Winkler,
2022). Further, infections of the CNS can cause cognitive, mood- related, psychiatric, and motor changes that persist beyond the acute phase of the infection (van den Pol, 2009).
Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations of Covid- 19
Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric consequences of Covid- 19 occur not only due to pathological factors such as inammation and lack of oxygenation due to cerebro­vascular disruption but also due to social and environmental factors such as iso­lation, lack of support, and public health concerns leading to multifactor- induced delirium (Achar & Ghosh, 2020; Nakamura et al., 2021; Oussalah et al., 2020). An early systematic review and meta- analysis of 1963 studies conducted to determine the neuropsychiatric and psychiatric presentations of SARS, MERS, and Covid- 19
 Infectious Disease and Neurocognition
found delirium (confusion in 65 percent and agitation in 69 percent of patients in intensive care) in addition to altered consciousness and dysexecutive syndrome at discharge (Rogers et al., 2020). Another systematic review of psychiatric sequalae in Covid- 19 patients included 1725 unique studies, of which 66 met the inclusion criteria and included follow- up time up to 7 months aer discharge. e majority of the included studies reported depression or anxiety, or both, with risk factors such as severity of Covid- 19 infection, female sex, and symptom duration, with pathophys­iological correlation to inammatory markers. Studies have also included accounts of post- traumatic stress disorder, cognitive decits, and sleep disturbances, with symptoms improving over time (Schou et al., 2021). Persistent neuropsychiatric and psychiatric sequalae aer Covid- 19 infection have also been reported. e National Institute for Health and Care Excellence United Kingdom guidelines recognized and conceptualized Covid- 19 symptoms persisting between 4 and 12 weeks post infec­tion as the so- called post- Covid- 19 syndrome (Greenhalgh et al., 2020). e rst neuropsychiatric follow- up study with survivors of Covid- 19 infection 6 months aer symptom onset found associations with symptoms of depression, post­traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and persistent low mood (Nersesjan et al., 2022). Subsequent reports have found a high prevalence of neuropsychiatric involvement aer Covid- 19 infection with increases in not previously diagnosed mood or anxiety disorders, dementia, fatigue, and sleep disorders (Davis et al., 2021; Taquet et al.,
2021). Another systematic review and meta- analysis of persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms of Covid- 19 found a high prevalence of sleep disorders and fatigue, expe­rienced by almost one in four patients and with relatively stable occurrence across various time points within the rst 6 months (Badenoch et al., 2022). Symptom re­ports of obsessive– compulsive disorder were also recorded in studies that screened patients at follow- up, with improvements observed between 1 and 3 months (Mazza et al., 2020, 2021).
Cognitive presentations of Covid- 19
Various aspects of Covid- 19 infection can likely impact cognition. White matter in the cerebrum is critical in cognitive control and function. Cerebral white matter is vulnerable to damage from ischemic strokes commonly recorded in Covid- 19. Evidence also points toward the acceleration of amyloid- β accumulation, linked to tau and TAR DNA- binding protein 43 (TDP- 43) pathology. TDP- 43 is an RNA/ DNA binding protein that plays a role in regulating RNA processing. Accumulation of TDP- 43 aggregates is commonly seen in the CNS in several neurodegenerative conditions such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (Jo et al., 2020; Miners et al., 2020). Cortical atrophy involving the limbic system of the brain be­fore and aer Covid- 19 infection in UK Biobank participants was visualized using magnetic resonance imaging (Douaud et al., 2022). Signicant long- term conse­quences were observed, which included reduction in gray matter thickness of the
Covid-19 55
parahippocampal gyrus (an important region responsible for memory encoding and retrieval) and a greater reduction of global brain size in Covid- 19- infected patients (Douaud et al., 2022).
A systematic review and meta- analysis examined cognitive functioning during the early emergence and acute phase of Covid- 19 infection (Crivelli et al., 2022). Findings showed cognitive decits increasing until the 10th day post infection, with eventual symptom alleviation. Other reported cognitive dysfunction symptoms included impairment in visual perception, verbal uency, and naming during the acute phase (Amalakanti et al., 2021; Tolentino et al., 2021). e systematic review also found reports of cohort studies with a high occurrence of moderate cognitive impairment in post- Covid- 19 infection, with additional studies reporting decits in cognitive domains such as executive functioning, memory, and verbal uency (Ermis et al., 2021; Hosp et al., 2021; Miskowiak et al., 2021). Meta- analysis showed overall poorer general cognitive functioning outcomes measured on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in people with Covid- 19 infection, compared to those without, in the duration between acute assessment and 6 months post in­fection (Crivelli et al., 2022). e most impacted cognitive domains were found to be memory, attention, and executive function up to 3 months aer infection with Covid- 19 (Crivelli et al., 2022; Ortelli et al., 2021; Rogers et al., 2020; Woo et al.,
2020). Reporting on variant- specic cognitive outcomes of Covid- 19 is limited. One study assessed cognitive function among patients infected with the omicron variant, a variant of concern that has a large number of spike mutations and high rates of transmission, using the Mini- Mental Status Examination (MMSE) and the MoCA. e MoCA assessed a cohort of 215 patients on executive function, abstrac­tion skills, targeting attention, computation, memory, and language. e MMSE as­sessed patients on basic cognition involving orientation to and awareness of time and place. Patients having Covid- 19 infection of the omicron variant obtained com­parable scores on both assessments; however, female patients aged 50 years and over reported signicantly lower scores, compared to men over the age of 50, indicating more pronounced cognitive dysfunction. Impairments were noted in calculation, uency, abstraction, and sustained attention among patients over 50 years (Yuan et al., 2023).
Long- term cognitive presentations of Covid- 19
Longitudinal cognitive follow- up of Covid- 19 patients also has found continuing memory problems, which were reported by 44 percent of patients aer 6 months and remained in more than 10 percent aer 8 months following mild Covid- 19 infection (Nersesjan et al., 2022). Another early report from a United Kingdom- wide surveil­lance study including 153 patients recorded cases of altered mental status (31 per­cent) and a neurocognitive (dementia- like) syndrome (26 percent) among cognitive presentations (Varatharaj et al., 2020). Long- term sequelae of Covid- 19 included
 Infectious Disease and Neurocognition
reports of reduced perfusion in the frontotemporal (Helms et al., 2020), temporal, sub- insular, and bilateral thalamic regions (Kumar et al., 2021; Montalvan et al., 2020; Poyiadji et al., 2020). Fatigue was also reported as a cognitive presentation in the acute and persistent phases of Covid- 19 infection. Rudro et al. (2020) dene Covid- 19- induced fatigue as “a decrease in physical and/ or mental performance that results from changes in central, psychological, and or/ peripheral factors due to the Covid- 19 disease” (p. 2).
Fatigue has been observed to be a more persistent, long- term consequence in the case of MERS and SARS infections, as compared to Covid- 19, with reports of this symptom lasting up to 39 months post initial infection (Rogers et al., 2020). In the case of Covid- 19, several studies have reported improvement in fatigue from the acute to follow- up phase (Chevinsky et al., 2021; Iqbal et al., 2021), with a median du­ration of symptom presentation of 14 days in mild infection and 32 days in severe in­fection (Schou et al., 2021; Sun et al., 2021). Comprehensive evaluation of post- acute neurological sequelae at 1 year from a cohort of 154,068 individuals infected with Covid- 19 found increased risk associated with memory problems and Alzheimer’s disease (Xu et al., 2022). e association between Covid- 19 and Alzheimer’s disease can be attributed to the entry of the virus into host cells through the ACE2 receptor as ACE2 overexpression is common in the brains of people with Alzheimer’s disease, thereby increasing the chances of viral invasion. Other etiologies such as reduction in BDNF due to ACE2 inhibition, presence of the apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 allele in Alzheimer’s disease (Verghese et al., 2011), oxidative stress, and neuroinammation also contribute to increased risk of Covid- 19 infection in Alzheimer’s disease (Rudnicka- Drożak et al., 2023).
When examining cross- sectional cognitive performance data among 81,337 pa­tients who had recovered from or no longer exhibited symptoms of Covid- 19 infec­tion, signicant cognitive decits were observed (Hampshire et al., 2021). Among the entire population tested using a web- based clinically validated cognitive as­sessment, the most pronounced decits were seen in cognitive function- related domains. ese included decits in problem- solving, reasoning, target detection, and spatial planning. Performance on tests assessing simpler functions such as working memory was spared (Hampshire et al., 2021). A nationwide cohort study determining the clinical sequelae of persistent Covid- 19 aer a year among pa­tients with mild infection found the highest prevalence of adverse health outcomes among those aged 41– 60 years. In this age group, impairments in concentration and memory were more predominant during the late phase (between 180 and 360 days since infection) (Mizrahi et al., 2023).
So- called brain fog is another reported long- term cognitive consequence of per­sistent Covid- 19 infection. e World Health Organization has described brain fog as an informal umbrella term used by patients to refer to complaints of multiple and diverse impairments in intellectual functioning during the post- acute phase of Covid- 19 (Krishnan et al., 2022). However, since the evidence for brain fog is mostly in the form of broad, colloquial, patient self- reports describing problems with
Covid-19 57
concentration, disorientation, low energy, and other psychological issues, it must be interpreted with caution (Hampshire et al., 2021).
e most common etiology of long- term cognitive impairment following viral in­fection has been attributed to microglial activation in the hippocampal region. is, in turn, is associated with hippocampal atrophy resulting from systemic inamma­tion, which may be due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, which is also pre­sent in Covid- 19 infection (Girard et al., 2018; Lindlau et al., 2015; Sasannejad et al., 2019; Vasek et al., 2016).
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is important to note that a very large number of publications have characterized and reported on the neurological, neuropsychiatric, and cognitive im­plications of infection from Covid- 19 during the early and emerging days of un­derstanding disease mechanisms for rapid containment. Specically, data on the cognitive decits caused by the disease were oen insucient and sometimes re­ported obscurely (Mao et al., 2020). However, as more studies were published, sys­tematic evidence synthesis since the declaration of the Covid- 19 pandemic in 2020 has provided substantiation of the multifold acute as well as persistent neuropsychi­atric, cognitive, and neurological manifestations of Covid- 19. Because of the novelty of Covid- 19, new studies will most likely continue to characterize the nature, se­verity, longitudinal trajectory, and pathophysiology of the cognitive and neuropsy­chiatric associations associated with Covid- 19.
References
ACHAR, A. & GHOSH, C. 2020. COVID- 19- associated neurological disorders: e potential route of
CNS invasion and blood- brain barrier relevance. Cells, 9, 2360.
AMALAKANTI, S., AREPALLI, K. V. R. & JILLELLA, J. P. 2021. Cognitive assessment in asympto-
matic COVID- 19 subjects. Virusdisease, 32, 146– 149.
BADENOCH, J. B., RENGASAMY, E. R., WATSON, C., JANSEN, K., CHAKRABORTY, S.,
SUNDARAM, R. D., HAFEEZ, D., BURCHILL, E., SAINI, A., THOMAS, L., CROSS, B., HUNT, C. K., CONTI, I., RALOVSKA, S., HUSSAIN, Z., BUTLER, M., POLLAK, T. A., KOYCHEV, I., MICHAEL, B. D., HOLLING, H., NICHOLSON, T. R., ROGERS, J. P. & ROONEY, A. G. 2022. Persistent neuropsychiatric symptoms aer COVID- 19: A systematic review and meta- analysis. Brain Commun, 4, fcab297.
BAUER, L., LAKSONO, B. M., DE VRIJ, F. M. S., KUSHNER, S. A., HARSCHNITZ, O. & VAN RIEL, D.
2022. e neuroinvasiveness, neurotropism, and neurovirulence of SARS- CoV- 2. Trends Neurosci, 45, 358– 368.
BODRO, M., COMPTA, Y. & SÁNCHEZ- VALLE, R. 2021. Presentations and mechanisms of CNS dis-
orders related to COVID- 19. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinamm, 8, e923.
BOHMWALD, K., GÁLVEZ, N. M. S., RÍOS, M. & KALERGIS, A. M. 2018. Neurologic alterations due
to respiratory virus infections. Front Cell Neurosci, 12, 386.
BRAGA, J., LEPRA, M., KISH, S. J., RUSJAN, P. M., NASSER, Z., VERHOEFF, N., VASDEV, N.,
BAGBY, M., BOILEAU, I., HUSAIN, M. I., KOLLA, N., GARCIA, A., CHAO, T., MIZRAHI, R.,