Echocardiographic assessment of right ventricular performance in COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome: the importance of systo-diastolic interaction.

BACKGROUND: The cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 have been described in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). The presence and impact of right ventricular (RV) diastolic function and performance has not been studied in this population yet. We describe the prevalence of RV diastolic dysfunction, assessed by the pulmonary valve pre-ejection A wave (PV A wave), and the RV systo-diastolic interaction, using the RV total isovolumic time (t-IVT), in COVID-19 ARDS. RESULTS: Prospective observational study enrolling patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 ARDS admitted to ICU who underwent a transthoracic echocardiogram within 24 h of ICU admission and at least a second one during the ICU stay. Respiratory, hemodynamic and biochemistry parameters were collected. 163 patients (age 61.0 ± 9.3 years, 72% males) were enrolled. 36 patients (22.1%) had RV dysfunction, 45 (27.1%) LV systolic dysfunction. 73 patients (44.7%) had PV A wave. The RV t-IVT correlated with TAPSE at ICU admission (p < 0.002; r - 0.61), presence of PV A wave (p < 0.001; r 0.78), peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) (p < 0.001; r 0.42), PEEP (p < 0.001; r 0.68), dynamic driving pressure (DDP) (p < 0.001; r 0.58), and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (p < 0.01; r - 0.35). The presence of PV A wave was associated with higher PIP (p < 0.001; r 0.45), higher PEEP (p < 0.001; r 0.56), higher DDP (p < 0.01, r 0.51), and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio (p < 0.001; r - 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: RV t-IVT and the presence of PV A wave are non-invasive means to describe a significant RV diastolic dysfunction and may be consider descriptive signs of RV performance in COVID-19 ARDS.

Epidemiology, monitoring, and treatment strategy in cardiogenic shock. A multinational cross-sectional survey of ESC-acute cardiovascular care association research section.

AIMS: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition burdened by mortality in up to 50% of cases. Few recommendations exist with intermediate-low level of evidence on CS management and no data on adherence across centres exist. We performed a survey to frame CS management at multinational level. METHODS AND RESULTS: An international cross-sectional survey was created and approved by European Society of Cardiology-Acute Cardiovascular Care Association board. A total of 337 responses from 60 countries were obtained. Data were assessed by the hospital level of care of the participants. The most common cause of CS was AMI (AMI-CS-79.9%) with significant difference according to hospital levels (P = 0.001), followed by acutely decompensated heart failure (HF) (13.4%), myocarditis (3.5%), and de novo HF (1.75%). In 37.8%, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is performed to all CS-patients as a standard approach, whereas 42.1% used PCI if electrocardiogram suggestive of ischaemia and 20.1% only if Universal definition of myocardial infarction criteria are fulfilled. Management (catecholamine titration and mechanical circulatory support escalation) is driven by mean arterial pressure (87.1%), echocardiography (84.4%), and lactate levels (83.4%). Combination of vasopressor and inotrope is chosen with the same frequency (37.7%) than inotrope alone as first-line pharmacological therapy (differences amongst hospital levels; P > 0.5). Noradrenaline is first-line vasopressor (89.9%) followed by dopamine (8.5%), whereas dobutamine is confirmed as the first-line inotrope (65.9%). CONCLUSION: Cardiogenic shock management is heterogenous and often not adherent to current recommendations. Quality improvement on an international level with evidence-based quality indicators should be developed to standardize diagnostic and therapeutic pathways.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults: evidence and implications.

Rates of survival with functional recovery for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are notably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is emerging as a modality to improve prognosis by augmenting perfusion to vital end-organs by utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during conventional CPR and stabilizing the patient for interventions aimed at reversing the aetiology of the arrest. Implementing this emergent procedure requires a substantial investment in resources, and even the most successful ECPR programs may nonetheless burden healthcare systems, clinicians, patients, and their families with unsalvageable patients supported by extracorporeal devices. Non-randomized and observational studies have repeatedly shown an association between ECPR and improved survival, versus conventional CPR, for in-hospital cardiac arrest in select patient populations. Recently, randomized controlled trials suggest benefit for ECPR over standard resuscitation, as well as the feasibility of performing such trials, in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest within highly coordinated healthcare delivery systems. Application of these data to clinical practice should be done cautiously, with outcomes likely to vary by the setting and system within which ECPR is initiated. ECPR introduces important ethical challenges, including whether it should be considered an extension of CPR, at what point it becomes sustained organ replacement therapy, and how to approach patients unable to recover or be bridged to heart replacement therapy. The economic impact of ECPR varies by health system, and has the potential to outstrip resources if used indiscriminately. Ideally, studies should include economic evaluations to inform health care systems about the cost-benefits of this therapy.

European Society of Cardiology guidance for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: part 1-epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis.

AIMS: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.

COVID-19 and Disruptive Modifications to Cardiac Critical Care Delivery: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a major unanticipated stress on the workforce, organizational structure, systems of care, and critical resource supplies. To ensure provider safety, to maximize efficiency, and to optimize patient outcomes, health systems need to be agile. Critical care cardiologists may be uniquely positioned to treat the numerous respiratory and cardiovascular complications of the SARS-CoV-2 and support clinicians without critical care training who may be suddenly asked to care for critically ill patients. This review draws upon the experiences of colleagues from heavily impacted regions of the United States and Europe, as well as lessons learned from military mass casualty medicine. This review offers pragmatic suggestions on how to implement scalable models for critical care delivery, cultivate educational tools for team training, and embrace technologies (e.g., telemedicine) to enable effective collaboration despite social distancing imperatives.

Expert consensus document: Echocardiography and lung ultrasonography for the assessment and management of acute heart failure.

Echocardiography is increasingly recommended for the diagnosis and assessment of patients with severe cardiac disease, including acute heart failure. Although previously considered to be within the realm of cardiologists, the development of ultrasonography technology has led to the adoption of echocardiography by acute care clinicians across a range of specialties. Data from echocardiography and lung ultrasonography can be used to improve diagnostic accuracy, guide and monitor the response to interventions, and communicate important prognostic information in patients with acute heart failure. However, without the appropriate skills and a good understanding of ultrasonography, its wider application to the most acutely unwell patients can have substantial pitfalls. This Consensus Statement, prepared by the Acute Heart Failure Study Group of the ESC Acute Cardiovascular Care Association, reviews the existing and potential roles of echocardiography and lung ultrasonography in the assessment and management of patients with acute heart failure, highlighting the differences from established practice where relevant.

The use of echocardiography in the critically ill; the role of FADE (Fast Assessment Diagnostic Echocardiography) training.

Echocardiography (echo) is a powerful technique that permits direct visualization and assessment of all the cardiac structures and assessment of the patients' haemodynamic status at the bedside. Echo allows detection of valvular disease, evaluation of ventricular function and the pericardium, detection of intracardiac/intrapulmonary shunts, and can be used to calculate flows and relative pressures between the cardiac chambers. This rapid point-of-care haemodynamic evaluation provides information to guide therapeutic interventions, including volume resuscitation, instigation of vasoactive therapy and/or referral for specialist cardiac/surgical intervention. Although there is abundant evidence in the cardiology literature regarding the use of echo, data in the critical care arena is less well defined, but emerging. The use of echo by intensive care doctors is likely to become routine, and therefore training for intensivists in this technique needs to be developed and supported. The Portuguese Working Group on Echocardiography has developed a skill-based program, FADE (Focused Assessment Diagnostic Echocardiography) in order to train clinicians in the use of bedside ultrasound as a diagnostic and monitoring tool for the critically ill.