Estimation of Admission D-dimer Cut-off Value to Predict Venous Thrombotic Events in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: Analysis of the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: Venous thrombotic events (VTE) are frequent in COVID-19, and elevated plasma D-dimer (pDd) and dyspnea are common in both entities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the admission pDd cut-off value associated with in-hospital VTE in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study analyzing the at-admission pDd cut-off value to predict VTE and anticoagulation intensity along hospitalization due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Among 9386 patients, 2.2% had VTE: 1.6% pulmonary embolism (PE), 0.4% deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and 0.2% both. Those with VTE had a higher prevalence of tachypnea (42.9% vs. 31.1%; p = 0.0005), basal O2 saturation <93% (45.4% vs. 33.1%; p = 0.0003), higher at admission pDd (median [IQR]: 1.4 [0.6-5.5] vs. 0.6 [0.4-1.2] µg/ml; p < 0.0001) and platelet count (median [IQR]: 208 [158-289] vs. 189 [148-245] platelets × 109/L; p = 0.0013). A pDd cut-off of 1.1 µg/ml showed specificity 72%, sensitivity 49%, positive predictive value (PPV) 4%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 99% for in-hospital VTE. A cut-off value of 4.7 µg/ml showed specificity of 95%, sensitivity of 27%, PPV of 9%, and NPV of 98%. Overall mortality was proportional to pDd value, with the lowest incidence for each pDd category depending on anticoagulation intensity: 26.3% for those with pDd >1.0 µg/ml treated with prophylactic dose (p < 0.0001), 28.8% for pDd for patients with pDd >2.0 µg/ml treated with intermediate dose (p = 0.0001), and 31.3% for those with pDd >3.0 µg/ml and full anticoagulation (p = 0.0183). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, a pDd value greater than 3.0 µg/ml can be considered to screen VTE and to consider full-dose anticoagulation.

Clinical Features and Risk Factors for Mortality Among Long-term Care Facility Residents Hospitalized Due to COVID-19 in Spain.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 severely impacted older adults and long-term care facility (LTCF) residents. Our primary aim was to describe differences in clinical and epidemiological variables, in-hospital management, and outcomes between LTCF residents and community-dwelling older adults hospitalized with COVID-19. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for mortality due to COVID-19 in hospitalized LTCF residents. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis within a retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients ≥75 years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 160 Spanish hospitals. Differences between groups and factors associated with mortality among LTCF residents were assessed through comparisons and logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 6 189 patients ≥75 years, 1 185 (19.1%) were LTCF residents and 4 548 (73.5%) were community-dwelling. LTCF residents were older (median: 87.4 vs 82.1 years), mostly female (61.6% vs 43.2%), had more severe functional dependence (47.0% vs 7.8%), more comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index: 6 vs 5), had dementia more often (59.1% vs 14.4%), and had shorter duration of symptoms (median: 3 vs 6 days) than community-dwelling patients (all, p < .001). Mortality risk factors in LTCF residents were severe functional dependence (adjusted odds ratios [aOR]: 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-2.83; p = .012), dyspnea (1.66; 1.16-2.39; p = .004), SatO2 < 94% (1.73; 1.27-2.37; p = .001), temperature ≥ 37.8°C (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013); qSOFA index ≥ 2 (1.62; 1.11-2.38; p = .013), bilateral infiltrates (1.98; 1.24-2.98; p < .001), and high C-reactive protein (1.005; 1.003-1.007; p < .001). In-hospital mortality was initially higher among LTCF residents (43.3% vs 39.7%), but lower after adjusting for sex, age, functional dependence, and comorbidities (aOR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.62-0.87; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Basal functional status and COVID-19 severity are risk factors of mortality in LTCF residents. The lower adjusted mortality rate in LTCF residents may be explained by earlier identification, treatment, and hospitalization for COVID-19.

Cardiometabolic Therapy and Mortality in Very Old Patients With Diabetes Hospitalized due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The effects of cardiometabolic drugs on the prognosis of diabetic patients with COVID-19, especially very old patients, are not well known. This work was aimed to analyze the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy (antidiabetic, antiaggregant, antihypertensive, and lipid-lowering drugs) and in-hospital mortality among patients ≥80 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) hospitalized for COVID-19. METHOD: We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, observational study in patients ≥80 years with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 1 and May 29, 2020. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between preadmission cardiometabolic therapy and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 2 763 patients ≥80 years old hospitalized due to COVID-19, 790 (28.6%) had T2DM. Of these patients, 385 (48.7%) died during admission. On the multivariate analysis, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.502, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.309-0.815, p = .005) and angiotensin receptor blockers (AOR 0.454, 95% CI: 0.274-0.759, p = .003) were independent protectors against in-hospital mortality, whereas the use of acetylsalicylic acid was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (AOR 1.761, 95% CI: 1.092-2.842, p = .020). Other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins showed neutral association with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We found important differences between cardiometabolic drugs and in-hospital mortality in older patients with T2DM hospitalized for COVID-19. Preadmission treatment with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers could reduce in-hospital mortality; other antidiabetic drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins seem to have a neutral effect; and acetylsalicylic acid could be associated with excess mortality.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Withdrawal Is Associated with Higher Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

Our main aim was to describe the effect on the severity of ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blocker) during COVID-19 hospitalization. A retrospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with ACEI/ARB. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis (IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation), NIMV (non-invasive mechanical ventilation), ICU admission (intensive care unit), and/or all-cause mortality). We evaluated both outcomes in patients whose treatment with ACEI/ARB was continued or withdrawn. Between February and June 2020, 11,205 patients were included, mean age 67 years (SD = 16.3) and 43.1% female; 2162 patients received ACEI/ARB treatment. ACEI/ARB treatment showed lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Hypertensive patients in the ACEI/ARB group had better results in IMV, ICU admission, and the composite outcome of prognosis (p < 0.0001 for all). No differences were found in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Patients previously treated with ACEI/ARB continuing treatment during hospitalization had a lower incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis than those whose treatment was withdrawn (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.63-0.76). ARB was associated with better survival than ACEI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.62-0.96). ACEI/ARB treatment during COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with protection on mortality. The benefits were greater in hypertensive, those who continued treatment, and those taking ARB.

Impact of Arterial Stiffness on All-Cause Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in Spain.

Older age and cardiovascular comorbidities are well-known risk factors for all-cause mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hypertension and age are the 2 principal determinants of arterial stiffness (AS). This study aimed to estimate AS in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization and analyze its association with all-cause in-hospital mortality. This observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort study analyzed 12 170 patients admitted to 150 Spanish centers included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Network. We compared AS, defined as pulse pressure ≥60 mm Hg, and clinical characteristics between survivors and nonsurvivors. Mean age was 67.5 (±16.1) years and 42.5% were women. Overall, 2606 (21.4%) subjects died. Admission systolic blood pressure (BP) <120 and ≥140 mm Hg was a predictor of higher all-cause mortality (23.5% and 22.8%, respectively, P<0.001), compared with systolic BP between 120 and 140 mm Hg (18.6%). The 4379 patients with AS (36.0%) were older and had higher systolic and lower diastolic BP. Multivariate analysis showed that AS and systolic BP <120 mm Hg significantly and independently predicted all-cause in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj]: 1.27, P=0.0001; ORadj: 1.48, P=0.0001, respectively) after adjusting for sex (males, ORadj: 1.6, P=0.0001), age tertiles (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 2.0 and 4.7, P=0.0001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 4.8 and 8.6, P=0.0001), heart failure, and previous and in-hospital antihypertensive treatment. Our data show that AS and admission systolic BP <120 mm Hg had independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization.