Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors in COVID-19: A Review.

Among the multiple uncertainties surrounding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, a research letter published in The Lancet implicated drugs that antagonize the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in an unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19. This report prompted investigations to identify mechanisms by which blocking angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) could lead to serious consequences in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The possible association between RAAS inhibitors use and unfavorable prognosis in this disease may have been biased by the presence of underlying cardiovascular diseases. As the number of COVID-19 cases has increased worldwide, it has now become possible to investigate the association between RAAS inhibitors and unfavorable prognosis in larger cohorts. Observational studies and one randomized clinical trial failed to identify any consistent association between the use of these drugs and unfavorable prognosis in COVID-19. In view of the accumulated clinical evidence, several scientific societies recommend that treatment with RAAS inhibitors should not be discontinued in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (unless contraindicated). This recommendation should be followed by clinicians and patients.

Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation: What's New in the Literature.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is considered the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, and it is associated with a significant risk of adverse events, especially ischemic stroke. Oral anticoagulation is the cornerstone for stroke prevention in AF; for many years, only vitamin K antagonists were used for this purpose, with an absolute risk reduction >60%. However, these agents have limitations, such as narrow therapeutic margins and drug-food and drug-drug interactions. More recently, 4 direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-non-vitamin K antagonists-have become available for patients with AF: dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban. In addition to a comparable efficacy to warfarin in large randomized controlled trials, DOACs were found to promote a lower risk of intracranial bleeding. The strategic dosage and lack of need for periodic prothrombin-time testing make their use attractive, especially for primary or secondary prevention of stroke in older adults. Furthermore, among patients with AF presenting with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, apixaban is associated with a reduction in serious bleeding events when compared with warfarin. On the other hand, there is no evidence of benefit of DOACs in patients with mechanical prosthetic valves or moderate/severe mitral stenosis. Furthermore, the suitability of DOACs in patients with liver disease is still poorly understood, and their safety in patients requiring renal replacement therapy remains uncertain. This review provides an overview of the main trials of DOACs, their pharmacology and safety profile, clinical implications, and best indications in light of the current evidence.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors in COVID-19: A Review

Among the multiple uncertainties surrounding the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, a research letter published in The Lancet implicated drugs that antagonize the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in an unfavorable prognosis of COVID-19. This report prompted investigations to identify mechanisms by which blocking angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) could lead to serious consequences in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The possible association between RAAS inhibitors use and unfavorable prognosis in this disease may have been biased by the presence of underlying cardiovascular diseases. As the number of COVID-19 cases has increased worldwide, it has now become possible to investigate the association between RAAS inhibitors and unfavorable prognosis in larger cohorts. Observational studies and one randomized clinical trial failed to identify any consistent association between the use of these drugs and unfavorable prognosis in COVID-19. In view of the accumulated clinical evidence, several scientific societies recommend that treatment with RAAS inhibitors should not be discontinued in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (unless contraindicated). This recommendation should be followed by clinicians and patients.

Efficacy of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide in combination with amiloride in multiple doses on blood pressure in patients with primary hypertension: a protocol for a factorial randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Thiazide diuretics have demonstrated favorable blood pressure lowering efficacy, but the equivalent doses of their more common agents, chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide, are still unclear. Further, concerns exist regarding adverse metabolic effects, which may be attenuated with the concomitant administration of a potassium-sparing diuretic, such as amiloride. This trial aims to investigate the efficacy of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide, in combination with amiloride at different doses, for initial management of patients with primary hypertension. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a factorial (2 × 2) randomized double-blinded clinical trial comparing the association of a thiazide diuretic (chlorthalidone 25 mg/day or hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg/day) with a potassium-sparing diuretic (amiloride 10 mg/day or amiloride 20 mg/day) in patients with primary hypertension. The primary outcome will be the mean change from baseline in 24-h systolic and diastolic blood pressure measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The secondary outcomes will be the mean change from baseline in daytime and nighttime systolic and diastolic blood pressure measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, mean change from baseline in systolic and diastolic blood pressure measured by office blood pressure, incidence of adverse events, variation of laboratory parameters, and proportion of patients who achieved blood pressure control. The follow-up will last 12 weeks. For a P alpha of 0.05, power of 80%, standard deviation of 9 mmHg, and absolute difference of 6 mmHg on systolic blood pressure on 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, it will be necessary to study a total of 76 patients. The sample size will be increased by 10% to compensate for losses, resulting in 84 patients being randomized. DISCUSSION: Diuretics are pivotal drugs for the treatment of hypertension. Chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide, in combination with amiloride in multiple doses, will be tested in terms of blood pressure lowering efficacy and safety. Since the intensity of blood pressure reduction is the major determinant of reduction in cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients, this study will help to determine which combination of diuretics represents the most appropriate treatment for this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03928145. Registered on 25 April 2019. Last update on 29 April 2019.

Lung ultrasound for the evaluation of pulmonary congestion in outpatients: a comparison with clinical assessment, natriuretic peptides, and echocardiography.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to define the performance of lung ultrasound (LUS) compared with clinical assessment, natriuretic peptides, and echocardiography, to evaluate decompensation in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) in an outpatient clinic. BACKGROUND: Evaluation of pulmonary congestion in chronic HF is challenging. LUS has been recently proposed as a reliable tool for the semiquantification of extravascular lung water through assessment of B-lines. METHODS: This was a cohort study of patients with moderate to severe systolic HF. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed to compare LUS with a previously validated clinical congestion score (CCS), amino-terminal portion of B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), E/e' ratio, chest x-ray, and 6-min walk test. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients were enrolled. Decompensation was present in 57.7% of patients when estimated by CCS, 68% by LUS, 53.6% by NT-proBNP, and 65.3% by E/e' ≥15. The number of B-lines was correlated to NT-proBNP (r = 0.72; p < 0.0001), E/e' (r = 0.68; p < 0.0001), and CCS (r = 0.43; p < 0.0001). In ROC analyses, considering as reference for decompensation a combined method (E/e' ≥ 15 and/or NT-proBNP >1,000 pg/ml), LUS yielded a C-statistic of 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 0.96), providing the best accuracy with a cutoff ≥ 15 B-lines (sensitivity 85%, specificity 83%). A systematic approach using CCS, E/e', NT-proBNP, chest x-ray, and 6-min walk test in different combinations as reference for decompensation also corroborated this cutoff and found a similar accuracy for LUS. CONCLUSIONS: In an HF outpatient clinic, B-lines were significantly correlated with more established parameters of decompensation. A B-line ≥15 cutoff could be considered for a quick and reliable assessment of decompensation in outpatients with HF.