Prognostic impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bronchial asthma in patients with heart failure.

PURPOSE: To analyze the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchial asthma on therapeutic management and prognosis of patients with heart failure (HF). METHODS: Analysis of the information collected in a clinical registry of patients referred to a specialized HF unit from January-2010 to June-2012. Clinical profile, treatment and prognosis of patients was evaluated, according to the presence of COPD or asthma. Survival analyses were conducted by means of Kaplan-Meier and Cox's methods. Median follow-up was 1493 days. RESULTS: We studied 2577 patients, of which 251 (9.7%) presented COPD and 96 (3.7%) bronchial asthma. Significant differences among study groups were observed regarding to the prescription of beta-blockers (COPD=89.6%; asthma=87.5%; no bronchopathy=94.1%; p=0.002) and SGLT2 inhibitors (COPD=35.1%; asthma=50%; no bronchopathy=38.3%; p=0.036). Also, patients with bronchial disease received less frequently a defibrillator (COPD=20.3%; asthma=20.8%; no broncopathy=29%; p=0.004). COPD was independently associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR=1.64; 95% CI 1.33-2.02), all-cause death or HF admission (HR=1.47; 95% CI 1.22-1.76) and cardiovascular death or heart transplantation (HR=1.39; 95% CI 1.08-1.79) as compared with patients with no bronchopathy. Bronchial asthma was not significantly associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: COPD, but not asthma, is an adverse independent prognostic factor in patients with HF.

Multidisciplinary approach of the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia, are there differences depending on the respiratory therapy used during admission to intensive care?

OBJECTIVE: To describe the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients who required admission to Intensive Care for severe COVID 19 pneumonia and to analyze the differences between those who received therapy exclusively with high-flow oxygen therapy compared to those who required invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Cohort, prospective and observational study. SETTING: Post-intensive care multidisciplinary program. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Patients who survived admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID 19 pneumonia from April 2020 to October 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Inclusion in the post-ICU multidisciplinary program. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Motor, sensory, psychological/psychiatric, respiratory and nutritional sequelae after hospital admission. RESULTS: 104 patients were included. 48 patients received high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (ONAF) and 56 invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The main sequelae found were distal neuropathy (33.9% IMV vs 10.4% ONAF); brachial plexopathy (10.7% IMV vs 0% ONAF); decrease in grip strength: right hand 20.67kg (±8.27) in VMI vs 31.8kg (±11.59) in ONAF and left hand 19.39kg (±8.45) in VMI vs 30.26kg (±12.74) in ONAF; and limited muscle balance in the lower limbs (28.6% VMI vs 8.6% ONAF). The differences observed between both groups did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable study. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained after the multivariate study suggest that there are no differences in the perceived physical sequelae one month after hospital discharge depending on the respiratory therapy used, whether it was high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or prolonged mechanical ventilation, although more studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions.

[Multidisciplinary approach of the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia, are there differences depending on the respiratory therapy used during admission to intensive care?] / Valoración multidisciplinar de las secuelas al mes del alta hospitalaria por neumonía grave COVID-19, ¿existen diferencias en función de la terapia respiratoria empleada durante su ingreso en Cuidados Intensivos?

Objective: To describe the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients who required admission to intensive care for severe COVID-19 pneumonia and to analyze the differences between those who received therapy exclusively with high-flow oxygen therapy compared to those who required invasive mechanical ventilation. Design: Cohort, prospective and observational study. Setting: Post-intensive care multidisciplinary program. Patients or participants: Patients who survived admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID-19 pneumonia from April 2020 to October 2021. Interventions: Inclusion in the post-ICU multidisciplinary program. Main variables of interest: Motor, sensory, psychological/psychiatric, respiratory and nutritional sequelae after hospital admission. Results: One hundred and four patients were included. 48 patients received high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (ONAF) and 56 invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The main sequelae found were distal neuropathy (33.9% IMV vs. 10.4% ONAF); brachial plexopathy (10.7% IMV vs. 0% ONAF); decrease in grip strength: right hand 20.67 kg (± 8.27) in VMI vs. 31.8 kg (± 11.59) in ONAF and left hand 19.39 kg (± 8.45) in VMI vs. 30.26 kg (± 12.74) in ONAF; and limited muscle balance in the lower limbs (28.6% VMI vs. 8.6% ONAF). The differences observed between both groups did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable study. Conclusions: The results obtained after the multivariate study suggest that there are no differences in the perceived physical sequelae one month after hospital discharge depending on the respiratory therapy used, whether it was high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or prolonged mechanical ventilation, although more studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions.

Prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a large sample of the Spanish working population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To date, in Spain, there are no studies that have evaluated the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a large sample of the working population of Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 13,179 workers (73% men; mean age: 40 years) from 5 regions of Spain who, between May 2008 and November 2010, had a medical examination with an electrocardiogram. The workers with suggestive abnormalities in the electrocardiogram or a predisposing medical history (exertional syncope or sudden death of a family member younger than 50 years) were referred for an echocardiographic evaluation. We defined hypertrophic cardiomyopathy as a parietal thickness ≥13mm in any segment of the left ventricle. We estimated the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in the entire sample and in the workers without hypertension. RESULTS: A total of 1008 workers were selected for the echocardiogram, although only 496 (49.2% of those selected) of these attended the appointment. After the echocardiogram, we detected 16 cases of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, estimating a prevalence of 0.24% for the entire sample. In the subgroup of workers with no hypertension, we observed 10 cases of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, which corresponds to an estimated prevalence of 0.19%. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample of the working population in Spain, the estimated prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was 0.24%. In the subgroup of patients with no hypertension, the estimated prevalence was 0.19%.

Prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a large sample of the Spanish working population. / Prevalencia de la miocardiopatía hipertrófica en una amplia muestra de la población laboral española.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To date, in Spain, there are no studies that have evaluated the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in the general population. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a large sample of the working population of Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 13,179 workers (73% men; mean age, 40 years) from 5 regions of Spain who, between May 2008 and November 2010, had a medical examination with an electrocardiogram. The workers with suggestive abnormalities in the electrocardiogram or a predisposing medical history (exertional syncope or sudden death of a family member younger than 50 years) were referred for an echocardiographic evaluation. We defined hypertrophic cardiomyopathy as a parietal thickness ≥13mm in any segment of the left ventricle. We estimated the prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in the entire sample and in the workers without hypertension. RESULTS: A total of 1008 workers were selected for the echocardiogram, although only 496 (49.2% of those selected) of these attended the appointment. After the echocardiogram, we detected 16 cases of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, estimating a prevalence of 0.24% for the entire sample. In the subgroup of workers with no hypertension, we observed 10 cases of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, which corresponds to an estimated prevalence of 0.19%. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample of the working population in Spain, the estimated prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was 0.24%. In the subgroup of patients with no hypertension, the estimated prevalence was 0.19%.

Clinical outcomes after tricuspid surgery : The role of previous cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to assess the outcomes of surgical treatment for severe tricuspid regurgitation according to whether cardiac surgery had been performed before the tricuspid valve intervention. METHODS: Between 1996 and 2013, 201 consecutive patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation underwent tricuspid surgery at our center. Patients were classified according to whether or not they had undergone previous cardiac surgery, which 33% of the sample had. Perioperative as well as long-term morbidity and mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 62.3 years. 32.8% underwent suture annuloplasty, 41.3% underwent ring annuloplasty, 15.4% received a bioprosthesis, and 10.4% received a mechanical prosthesis. There were no significant differences in perioperative mortality between the group that had not undergone previous cardiac surgery and the group that had (12.7% vs. 17.9%, respectively; p = 0.32). The long-term mortality rate (median follow-up time: 53 months) was 43.3%. Long-term survival curves showed no significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.884), and previous cardiac surgery was not a predictive factor for long-term mortality (hazard ratio = 1.211; p = 0.521). CONCLUSION: In a series of patients who underwent tricuspid valve surgery, no significant differences were observed in perioperative mortality or in long-term survival according to whether or not subjects had undergone previous cardiac surgery.