RESUMO
Although numerous patient-specific co-factors have been shown to be associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19, the prognostic value of thalassaemic syndromes in COVID-19 patients remains poorly understood. We studied the outcomes of 137 COVID-19 patients with a history of transfusion-dependent thalassaemia (TDT) and transfusion independent thalassaemia (TIT) extracted from a large international cohort and compared them with the outcomes from a matched cohort of COVID-19 patients with no history of thalassaemia. The mean age of thalassaemia patients included in our study was 41 ± 16 years (48.9% male). Almost 81% of these patients suffered from TDT requiring blood transfusions on a regular basis. 38.7% of patients were blood group O. Cardiac iron overload was documented in 6.8% of study patients, whereas liver iron overload was documented in 35% of study patients. 40% of thalassaemia patients had a history of splenectomy. 27.7% of study patients required hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection. Amongst the hospitalized patients, one patient died (0.7%) and one patient required intubation. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was required in almost 5% of study patients. After adjustment for age-, sex- and other known risk factors (cardiac disease, kidney disease and pulmonary disease), the rate of in-hospital complications (supplemental oxygen use, admission to an intensive care unit for CPAP therapy or intubation) and all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the thalassaemia group compared to the matched cohort with no history of thalassaemia. Amongst thalassaemia patients in general, the TIT group exhibited a higher rate of hospitalization compared to the TDT group (p = 0.001). In addition, the rate of complications such as acute kidney injury and need for supplemental oxygen was significantly higher in the TIT group compared to the TDT group. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, age and history of heart or kidney disease were all found to be independent risk factors for increased in-hospital, all-cause mortality, whereas the presence of thalassaemia (either TDT or TIT) was found to be independently associated with reduced all-cause mortality. The presence of thalassaemia in COVID-19 patients was independently associated with lower in-hospital, all-cause mortality and few in-hospital complications in our study. The pathophysiology of this is unclear and needs to be studied in vitro and in animal models.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Sobrecarga de Ferro , Talassemia , COVID-19/complicações , Feminino , Hospitais , Humanos , Sobrecarga de Ferro/etiologia , Masculino , Oxigênio , Sistema de Registros , Talassemia/complicações , Talassemia/terapiaRESUMO
Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Tromboembolia , Administração Oral , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hospitalização , Hospitais , Humanos , Prognóstico , Sistema de Registros , Tromboembolia/prevenção & controleRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. METHODS: HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. RESULTS: We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION: RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.
Assuntos
Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/uso terapêutico , COVID-19 , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/terapia , Comorbidade , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/epidemiologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/etiologia , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Prognóstico , Sistema de Registros , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2 , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Espanha/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Sistema de Registros , COVID-19/mortalidade , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Correlação de Dados , Comparação Transcultural , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia/mortalidade , Hospitalização , Humanos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Estudos Prospectivos , Respiração Artificial , Insuficiência Respiratória/tratamento farmacológico , Insuficiência Respiratória/mortalidade , Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. METHODS: post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65-74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71-83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission <92% (OR 5.85), severe lymphopenia (<500/mm3) (OR 3.36) and qSOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score) >1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation <92%, severe lymphopenia and qSOFA scale >1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/fisiopatologia , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Avaliação Geriátrica/métodos , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Cooperação Internacional , Masculino , Mortalidade , Multimorbidade , Prognóstico , Sistema de Registros/estatística & dados numéricos , Medição de Risco/métodos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: A significant number of heart failure (HF) patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) experience ventricular function recovery during follow-up. We studied the variables associated with LVEF recovery in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan (SV) in clinical practice. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospective and multicenter registry including 249 HF outpatients with reduced LVEF who started SV between October 2016 and March 2017. The patients were classified into 2 groups according to LVEF at the end of follow-up (>35%: group R, or ≤35%: group NR). RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 7 ± 0.1 months, 62 patients (24.8%) had LVEF >35%. They were older (71.3 ± 10.8 vs. 67.5 ± 12.1 years, p = 0.025), and suffered more often from hypertension (83.9 vs. 73.8%, p = 0.096) and higher blood pressure before and after SV (both, p < 0.01). They took more often high doses of beta-blockers (30.6 vs. 27.8%, p = 0.002), with a smaller proportion undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (14.8 vs. 29.0%, p = 0.028) and fewer implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICD; 32.8 vs. 67.9%, p < 0.001), this being the only predictive variable of NR in the multivariate analysis (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13-0.47, p < 0.0001). At the end of follow-up, the mean LVEF in group R was 41.9 ± 8.1% (vs. 26.3 ± 4.7% in group NR, p < 0.001), with an improvement compared with the initial LVEF of 14.6 ± 10.8% (vs. 0.8 ± 4.5% in group NR, p < 0.0001). Functional class improved in both groups, mainly in group R (p = 0.035), with fewer visits to the emergency department (11.5 vs. 21.6%, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with LVEF ≤35% treated with SV, not carrying an ICD was independently associated with LVEF recovery, which was related to greater improvement in functional class.
Assuntos
Aminobutiratos/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Volume Sistólico , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Função Ventricular Esquerda , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Compostos de Bifenilo , Terapia de Ressincronização Cardíaca , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Estudos Prospectivos , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Sistema de Registros , Resultado do Tratamento , ValsartanaRESUMO
Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) is a new therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Our aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of this drug daily clinical practice. We performed a multicenter registry in 10 hospitals. All patients who started SV from October 2016 to March 2017 on an outpatient basis were included. A total of 427 patients started treatment with SV. Mean follow-up was 7.0 ± 0.1 months. Forty-nine patients (11.5%) discontinued SV, and 12 (2.8%) died. SV discontinuation was associated with higher cardiovascular (hazard ratio 13.22, 95% confidence interval, 6.71-15.73, P < 0.001) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 13.51, 95% confidence interval 3.22-56.13, P < 0.001). Symptomatic hypotension occurred in 71 patients (16.6%). Baseline N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels, functional class, and left ventricular ejection fraction improved at the end of follow-up in patients who continued with SV (all P values ≤0.001). This improvement was not significant in patients with SV discontinuation. SV has a good tolerability in patients from daily clinical practice. SV withdrawal in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction was independently associated with increased all-cause mortality. Patients who continued with SV presented an improvement in functional class left ventricular ejection fraction and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels.
Assuntos
Aminobutiratos/uso terapêutico , Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Neprilisina/antagonistas & inibidores , Inibidores de Proteases/uso terapêutico , Volume Sistólico/efeitos dos fármacos , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Função Ventricular Esquerda/efeitos dos fármacos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aminobutiratos/efeitos adversos , Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/efeitos adversos , Biomarcadores/sangue , Compostos de Bifenilo , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/sangue , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Peptídeo Natriurético Encefálico/sangue , Fragmentos de Peptídeos/sangue , Estudos Prospectivos , Inibidores de Proteases/efeitos adversos , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Sistema de Registros , Espanha , Tetrazóis/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , ValsartanaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Women are underrepresented in sacubitril/valsartan (SV) clinical trials. The aim of this study was to assess sex-specific differences in efficacy, tolerability, and safety of SV in real-world heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients. METHODS: A prospective registry in 10 centers including all patients who started SV during the last 6 months was analyzed in this study. RESULTS: A total of 427 patients were included, 126 (29.5%) were women. There were no substantial differences in HFrEF treatment before SV initiation, although fewer women than men carried an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (57 [45.2%] vs. 173 [58.1%], p = 0.02). SV starting dose was 24/26 mg b.i.d. in 206 patients (48.2%), 49/51 mg b.i.d. in 184 (43.1%), and 97/103 mg b.i.d. in 34 (8.2%), without relevant differences associated to sex. There were no losses during a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 0.1 months. The proportion of patients who discontinued the drug (16 [12.7%] women vs. 33 [11.0%] men, p = 0.66) or presented SV-related adverse effects (31 [24.6%] women vs. 79 [26.5%] men, p = 0.72) was also similar in both sexes. However, female sex was an independent predictor of functional class improvement in the multivariate analysis (odds ratio 2.33, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-4.38, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: SV in women with HFrEF has a similar tolerability as in men. Females seem to have a more frequent functional class improvement than males.
Assuntos
Aminobutiratos/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Fatores Sexuais , Volume Sistólico , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aminobutiratos/farmacologia , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/farmacologia , Compostos de Bifenilo , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Estudos Prospectivos , Espanha , Tetrazóis/farmacologia , Resultado do Tratamento , ValsartanaRESUMO
Our aim is to describe the characteristics of the patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (SV) in daily clinical practice. This is a prospective registry in 10 hospitals including all patients who started SV in everyday clinical practice. From October 2016 to March 2017, 427 patients started treatment with SV. The mean age was 68.1 ± 12.4 years, and 30.5% were women (22.0% in PARADIGM-HF, P < 0.001). Comparing our cohort with patients included in PARADIGM-HF, baseline treatment was different, with a lower ratio of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (2.7 vs. 3.5, P < 0.001), and a higher proportion of patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillator (53.8% vs. 15%, P < 0.001), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (25.8% vs. 5%, P < 0.001). Treatment with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists was more frequent (76.7% vs. 60.0%, P < 0.001), and the use of beta-blockers was similar (94.6% vs. 93.0%, P = 0.43). We observed more patients in functional class III-IV (30.4 vs. 24.8, P = 0.015), higher levels of Nt pro-BNP [3421 (904-4161) vs. 1631 (885-3154) pg/mL] and worse renal function (creatinine level 1.3 ± 0.7 vs. 1.1 ± 0.3 mg/dL, P < 0.001). In real life, patients receiving SV have a higher risk profile than in the pivotal trial, poorer functional class, higher levels of natriuretic peptides, and worse renal function.
Assuntos
Aminobutiratos/uso terapêutico , Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Neprilisina/antagonistas & inibidores , Inibidores de Proteases/uso terapêutico , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aminobutiratos/efeitos adversos , Bloqueadores do Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/efeitos adversos , Biomarcadores/sangue , Compostos de Bifenilo , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Nível de Saúde , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Rim/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Peptídeo Natriurético Encefálico/sangue , Fragmentos de Peptídeos/sangue , Estudos Prospectivos , Inibidores de Proteases/efeitos adversos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de Risco , Espanha , Tetrazóis/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , ValsartanaRESUMO
Background COVID-19 is an infectious illness, featured by an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, no standard antithrombotic therapy is currently recommended for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of additional therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. Methods and Results A total of 8168 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. Study population included patients treated with PAC or with PAC and aspirin. A comparison of clinical outcomes between patients treated with PAC versus PAC and aspirin was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score matching. Of 7824 patients with complete data, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with PAC and aspirin versus PAC (15% versus 21%, Log Rank P=0.01). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of patients with COVID-19, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure, and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; [95% CI 0.42-0.92], P=0.018). Conclusions Combination PAC and aspirin was associated with lower mortality risk among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a propensity score matched population compared to PAC alone.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Pontuação de Propensão , Sistema de Registros , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for COVID-19 is continuously evolving. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin-rich microthrombi in several organs. The aim of the study was therefore to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. METHODS: 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation-COVID-19 Registry). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. Data on APT, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, were obtained for each patient. RESULTS: During hospitalisation, 730 (9%) patients received single APT (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (74±12 years vs 63±17 years, p<0.01), more frequently male (68% vs 57%, p<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs 16%, p<0.01). Patients treated with APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs 19%, p=0.64), need for invasive ventilation (8.7% vs 8.5%, p=0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs 2.5% p=0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs 2.4%, p=0.43), but had shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8±5 days vs 11±7 days, p=0.01); however, when comparing patients with APT versus no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (log-rank p<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.94). On multivariable analysis, in-hospital APT was associated with lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: APT during hospitalisation for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04334291.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , COVID-19/mortalidade , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Hospitalização , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Sistema de Registros , Respiração ArtificialRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Smoking has been associated with poorer outcomes in relation to COVID-19. Smokers have higher risk of mortality and have a more severe clinical course. There is paucity of data available on this issue, and a definitive link between smoking and COVID-19 prognosis has yet to be established. METHODS: We included 5224 patients with COVID-19 with an available smoking history in a multicentre international registry Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19 (NCT04334291). Patients were included following an in-hospital admission with a COVID-19 diagnosis. We analysed the outcomes of patients with a current or prior history of smoking compared with the non-smoking group. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital death. RESULTS: Finally, 5224 patients with COVID-19 with available smoking status were analysed. A total of 3983 (67.9%) patients were non-smokers, 934 (15.9%) were former smokers and 307 (5.2%) were active smokers. The median age was 66 years (IQR 52.0-77.0) and 58.6% were male. The most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (48.5%) and dyslipidaemia (33.0%). A relevant lung disease was present in 19.4%. In-hospital complications such sepsis (23.6%) and embolic events (4.3%) occurred more frequently in the smoker group (p<0.001 for both). All cause-death was higher among smokers (active or former smokers) compared with non-smokers (27.6 vs 18.4%, p<0.001). Following a multivariate analysis, current smoking was considered as an independent predictor of mortality (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.82, p=0.017) and a combined endpoint of severe disease (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.43, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: Smoking has a negative prognostic impact on patients hospitalised with COVID-19.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations, where it is associated with more complications and higher mortality. METHODS: Analysis of the international HOPE registry (NCT04334291). The objective was to assess the prognostic information of AF in COVID-19 patients. A multivariate analysis and propensity score matching were performed to assess the relationship between AF and mortality. We also evaluated the impact on mortality and embolic events of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in these patients. RESULTS: Among 6217 patients enrolled in the HOPE registry, 250 had AF (4.5%). AF patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. After propensity score matching, these differences were attenuated. Despite this, patients with AF had a higher incidence of in-hospital complications such as heart failure (19.3% vs 11.6%, P=.021) and respiratory insufficiency (75.9% vs 62.3%, P=.002), as well as a higher 60-day mortality rate (43.4% vs 30.9%, P=.005). On multivariate analysis, AF was independently associated with higher 60-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.234; 95%CI, 1.003-1.519). CHA2DS2-VASc score acceptably predicts 60-day mortality in COVID-19 patients (area ROC, 0.748; 95%CI, 0.733-0.764), but not its embolic risk (area ROC, 0.411; 95%CI, 0.147-0.675). CONCLUSIONS: AF in COVID-19 patients is associated with a higher number of complications and 60-day mortality. The CHA2DS2-VASc score may be a good risk marker in COVID patients but does not predict their embolic risk.
Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , COVID-19 , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico , Fibrilação Atrial/epidemiologia , COVID-19/complicações , Humanos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Sistema de Registros , Medição de Risco , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
There is limited information on the presenting characteristics, prognosis, and therapeutic approaches of young patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to investigate the baseline characteristics, in-hospital treatment, and outcomes of a wide cohort < 65 years admitted for COVID-19. Using the international multicenter HOPE-COVID-19 registry, we evaluated the baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and prognosis of patients < 65 years discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19, also compared with the elderly counterpart. Of the included 5746 patients, 2676 were < 65 and 3070 ≥ 65 years. All risk factors and several parameters suggestive of worse clinical presentation augmented through increasing age classes. In-hospital mortality rates were 6.8% and 32.1% in the younger and older cohort, respectively (p < 0.001). Among young patients, mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMVwere positively correlated with age. Contrariwise, over 65 years of age this trend was broken so that only the association between age and mortality was persistent, while the rates of access to ICU and IMV started to decline. Younger patients also recognized specific predictors of case fatality, such as obesity and gender. Age negatively impacts on mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMV in patients < 65 years. In elderly patients only case fatality rate keeps augmenting in a stepwise manner through increasing age categories, while therapeutic approaches become more conservative. Besides age, obesity, gender, history of cancer, and severe dyspnea, tachypnea, chest X-ray bilateral abnormalities, abnormal level of creatinine and leucocyte among admission parameters seem to play a central role in the outcome of patients younger than 65 years.
Assuntos
Envelhecimento , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/mortalidade , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Comorbidade , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Sistema de Registros , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations, where it is associated with more complications and higher mortality. METHODS: Analysis of the international HOPE registry (NCT04334291). The objective was to assess the prognostic information of AF in COVID-19 patients. A multivariate analysis and propensity score matching were performed to assess the relationship between AF and mortality. We also evaluated the impact on mortality and embolic events of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in these patients. RESULTS: Among 6217 patients enrolled in the HOPE registry, 250 had AF (4.5%). AF patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. After propensity score matching, these differences were attenuated. Despite this, patients with AF had a higher incidence of in-hospital complications such as heart failure (19.3% vs 11.6%, P = .021) and respiratory insufficiency (75.9% vs 62.3%, P = .002), as well as a higher 60-day mortality rate (43.4% vs 30.9%, P = .005). On multivariate analysis, AF was independently associated with higher 60-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.234; 95%CI, 1.003-1.519). CHA2DS2-VASc score acceptably predicts 60-day mortality in COVID-19 patients (area ROC, 0.748; 95%CI, 0.733-0.764), but not its embolic risk (area ROC, 0.411; 95%CI, 0.147-0.675). CONCLUSIONS: AF in COVID-19 patients is associated with a higher number of complications and 60-day mortality. The CHA2DS2-VASc score may be a good risk marker in COVID patients but does not predict their embolic risk.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: HF elderly patients are underrepresented in Sacubitril/Valsartan HF trials, and the effect of S/V in real-life patients with advanced age is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use and safety of S/V in a real-word cohort of elderly patients. METHODS: We performed a prospective registry of patients who started S/V in clinical practice. We compared baseline characteristics, adverse events during follow-up and causes of S/V withdrawal according to age. RESULTS: A total of 427 patients started treatment with S/V: 222 (52.0%)<70 years old, 140 (32.8%) between 70 and 79 and 65 (15.2%)≥80. During a mean follow-up of 7.0±0.1months S/V was well tolerated, with no age-related differences in adverse events (26.8%, 25.9%, 23.1% respectively; p=0.83). Symptomatic hypotension tended to be more frequent in the elderly (19.8%, 25.6%, 33.3% respectively; p=0.17). The withdrawal of S/V was more frequent in younger patients (14.4%, 10.0%, 4.6% respectively; p=0.05) and related to poor prognosis (HR 13.51, 95% CI 3.22-56.13, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Sacubitril/Valsartan is useful and safe in elderly people with HF-rEF in real-life clinical practice, and withdrawal is associated to poor prognosis. The doses achieved are lower in elderly people.
Assuntos
Aminobutiratos/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/uso terapêutico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Tetrazóis/uso terapêutico , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aminobutiratos/administração & dosagem , Aminobutiratos/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina/efeitos adversos , Compostos de Bifenilo , Estudos de Coortes , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Insuficiência Cardíaca/mortalidade , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Prognóstico , Estudos Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros , Volume Sistólico , Tetrazóis/administração & dosagem , Tetrazóis/efeitos adversos , Valsartana , Suspensão de Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Dysnatremia is associated with increased mortality in patients with community-acquired pneumonia. SARS-COV2 (Severe-acute-respiratory syndrome caused by Coronavirus-type 2) pneumonia can be fatal. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether admittance dysnatremia is associated with mortality, sepsis, or intensive therapy (IT) in patients hospitalized with SARS-COV2 pneumonia. This is a retrospective study of the HOPE-COVID-19 registry, with data collected from January 1th through April 31th, 2020. We selected all hospitalized adult patients with RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-COV2 pneumonia and a registered admission serum sodium level (SNa). Patients were classified as hyponatremic (SNa <135 mmol/L), eunatremic (SNa 135-145 mmol/L), or hypernatremic (SNa >145 mmol/L). Multivariable analyses were performed to elucidate independent relationships of admission hyponatremia and hypernatremia, with mortality, sepsis, or IT during hospitalization. Four thousand six hundred sixty-four patients were analyzed, median age 66 (52-77), 58% males. Death occurred in 988 (21.2%) patients, sepsis was diagnosed in 551 (12%) and IT in 838 (18.4%). Hyponatremia was present in 957/4,664 (20.5%) patients, and hypernatremia in 174/4,664 (3.7%). Both hyponatremia and hypernatremia were associated with mortality and sepsis. Only hyponatremia was associated with IT. In conclusion, hyponatremia and hypernatremia at admission are factors independently associated with mortality and sepsis in patients hospitalized with SARS-COV2 pneumonia. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04334291, NCT04334291.
Assuntos
COVID-19/mortalidade , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Hipernatremia/fisiopatologia , Hiponatremia/fisiopatologia , Sistema de Registros/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Idoso , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/virologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Saúde Global , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de SobrevidaRESUMO
Myocardial perforation is a rare complication following pacemaker implantation that may cause cardiac tamponade. If it does occur, it is usually at the time of lead insertion. This condition requires urgent recognition since the prompt drainage of the pericardial fluid may be lifesaving. We present a case report of myocardial perforation complicated by cardiac tamponade 4 days after pacemaker lead insertion that was repaired surgically.