Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effect before and during hospitalization in COVID-19 outcomes: Final analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19) registry.

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.

Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From a Multicenter International Prospective Registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019 [HOPE-COVID19]).

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.

Usefulness of oral anticoagulation in patients with coronary aneurysms: Insights from the CAAR registry.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the Usefulness of oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) in patients with coronary artery aneurysm (CAA). BACKGROUND: Data on the most adequate antithrombotic CAA management is lacking. METHODS: Patients included in CAAR (Coronary Artery Aneurysm Registry, Clinical Trials.gov: NCT02563626) were selected. Patients were divided in OAT and non-OAT groups, according to anticoagulation status at discharge and 2:1 propensity score matching with replacement was performed. The primary endpoint of the analysis was a composite and mutual exclusive endpoint of myocardial infarction, unstable angina (UA), and aneurysm thrombosis (coronary ischemic endpoint). Net adverse clinical events, major adverse cardiovascular events, their single components, cardiovascular death, re-hospitalizations for heart failure, stroke, aneurysm thrombosis, and bleeding were the secondary ones. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred thirty-one patients were discharged without OAT and 211 with OAT. In the propensity-matched sample (390 patients in the non-OAT group, 195 patients in the OAT group), after 3 years of median follow-up (interquartile range 1-6 years), the rate of the primary endpoint (coronary ischemic endpoint) was significantly less in the OAT group as compared to non-OAT group (8.7 vs. 17.2%, respectively; p = .01), driven by a significant reduction in UA (4.6 vs. 10%, p < .01) and aneurysm thrombosis (0 vs. 3.1%, p = .03), along with a non-significant reduction in MI (4.1 vs. 7.7%, p = .13). A non-significant increase in bleedings, mainly BARC type 1 (55%), was found in the OAT-group (10.3% in the non-OAT vs. 6.2% in the OAT group, p = .08). CONCLUSION: OAT decreases the composite endpoint of UA, myocardial infarction, and aneurysm thrombosis in patients with CAA, despite a non-significant higher risk of bleeding.

Risk prediction of major cardiac adverse events and all-cause death following covid-19 hospitalization at one year follow-up: The HOPE-2 score.

BACKGROUND: Long-term consequences of COVID-19 are still partly known. AIM OF THE STUDY: To derive a clinical score for risk prediction of long-term major cardiac adverse events (MACE) and all cause death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. METHODS: 2573 consecutive patients were enrolled in a multicenter, international registry (HOPE-2) from January 2020 to April 2021 and identified as the derivation cohort. Five hundred and twenty-six patients from the Cardio-Covid-Italy registry were considered as external validation cohort. A long-term prognostic risk score for MACE and all cause death was derived from a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: Out of 2573 patients enrolled in the HOPE-2 registry, 1481 (58 %) were male, with mean age of 60±16 years. At long-term follow-up, the overall rate of patients affected by MACE and/or all cause death was 7.8 %. After multivariable regression analysis, independent predictors of MACE and all cause death were identified. The HOPE-2 prognostic score was therefore calculated by giving: 1-4 points for age class (<65 years, 65-74, 75-84, ≥85), 3 points for history of cardiovascular disease, 1 point for hypertension, 3 points for increased troponin serum levels at admission and 2 points for acute renal failure during hospitalization. Score accuracy at ROC curve analysis was 0.79 (0.74 at external validation). Stratification into 3 risk groups (<3, 3-6, >6 points) classified patients into low, intermediate and high risk. The observed MACE and all-cause death rates were 1.9 %, 9.4 % and 26.3 % for low- intermediate and high-risk patients, respectively (Log-rank test p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The HOPE-2 prognostic score may be useful for long-term risk stratification in patients with previous COVID-19 hospitalization. High-risk patients may require a strict follow-up.

Elevated Troponins after COVID-19 Hospitalization and Long-Term COVID-19 Symptoms: Incidence, Prognosis, and Clinical Outcomes-Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE-2).

Background: Acute cardiac injury (ACI) after COVID-19 has been linked with unfavorable clinical outcomes, but data on the clinical impact of elevated cardiac troponin on discharge during follow-up are scarce. Our objective is to elucidate the clinical outcome of patients with elevated troponin on discharge after surviving a COVID-19 hospitalization. Methods: We conducted an analysis in the prospective registry HOPE-2 (NCT04778020). Only patients discharged alive were selected for analysis, and all-cause death on follow-up was considered as the primary endpoint. As a secondary endpoint, we established any long-term COVID-19 symptoms. HOPE-2 stopped enrolling patients on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, of which 1805 were deceased during the acute phase. Finally, 2382 patients alive on discharge underwent propensity score matching by relevant baseline variables in a 1:3 fashion, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Results: Patients with elevated troponin experienced significantly higher all-cause death during follow-up (log-rank = 27.23, p < 0.001), and had a higher chance of experiencing long-term COVID-19 cardiovascular symptoms. Specifically, fatigue and dyspnea (57.7% and 62.8%, with p-values of 0.009 and <0.001, respectively) are among the most common. Conclusions: After surviving the acute phase, patients with elevated troponin on discharge present increased mortality and long-term COVID-19 symptoms over time, which is clinically relevant in follow-up visits.

Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Heart Disease: Incidence, Prognostic Factors, Outcomes and Vaccination: Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE 2).

BACKGROUND: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81-3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome and diabetes mellitus: a propensity-matched analysis of the International HOPE-II COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a higher rate of severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, data about post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) in patients with DM are limited. Methods: This multicenter, propensity score-matched study compared long-term follow-up data about cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other symptoms in 8,719 patients with DM to those without DM. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) according to age and sex resulted in 1,548 matched pairs. Results: Diabetics and nondiabetics had a mean age of 72.6 ± 12.7 years old. At follow-up, cardiovascular symptoms such as dyspnea and increased resting heart rate occurred less in patients with DM (13.2% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.01) than those without DM (2.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.05), respectively. The incidence of newly diagnosed arterial hypertension was slightly lower in DM patients as compared to non-DM patients (0.5% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.18). Abnormal spirometry was observed more in patients with DM than those without DM (18.8% vs. 13; p = 0.24). Paranoia was diagnosed more frequently in patients with DM than in non-DM patients at follow-up time (4% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.009). The incidence of newly diagnosed renal insufficiency was higher in patients suffering from DM as compared to patients without DM (4.8% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.09). The rate of readmission was comparable in patients with and without DM (19.7% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.61). The reinfection rate with COVID-19 was comparable in both groups (2.9% in diabetics vs. 2.3% in nondiabetics; p = 0.55). Long-term mortality was higher in DM patients than in non-DM patients (33.9% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The mortality rate was higher in patients with DM type II as compared to those without DM. Readmission and reinfection rates with COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. The incidence of cardiovascular symptoms was higher in patients without DM.

Clinical Profile and Determinants of Mortality in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease Admitted for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Predictors of poor prognosis in healthy, young, individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of poor prognosis in previously healthy young individuals admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. All patients without co-morbidities, without usual treatments and ≤65 years old were selected from an international registry (HOPE-COVID-19, NCT04334291). We focused on baseline variables-symptoms and signs at admission-to analyse risk factors for poor prognosis. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse clinical events during hospitalization including mortality, mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, prone, sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and embolic events. RESULTS: Overall, 773 healthy young patients were included. The primary composite end point was observed in 29% (225/773) and the overall mortality rate was 3.6% (28/773). In the combined event group, 75% (168/225) of patients were men and the mean age was 49 (±11) years, whereas in the non-combined event group, the prevalence of male gender was 43% (238/548) and the mean age was 42 (±13) years (p < 0.001 for both). On admission, respiratory insufficiency and cough were described in 51.4% (114/222) and 76% (170/223) of patients, respectively, in the combined event group, versus 7.9% (42/533) and 56% (302/543) of patients in the other group (p < 0.001 for both). The strongest independent predictor for the combined end point was desaturation (Spo2 <92%) (OR 5.40; 95% CI 3.34-8.75; p < 0.001), followed by tachypnoea (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.93-5.21; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 3.01; 95% CI 1.96-4.61; p < 0.001) and pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray at admission (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.18-4.16; p 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Major adverse clinical events were unexpectedly high considering the baseline characteristics of the cohort. Signs of respiratory compromise at admission and male gender, were predictive for poor prognosis among young healthy patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Aspirin Therapy on Prophylactic Anticoagulation for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis of the HOPE-COVID-19 Registry.

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.

Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in COVID-19: the Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry.

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.

[Atrial fibrillation in patients with COVID-19. Usefulness of the CHA2DS2-VASc score: an analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 registry]. / Fibrilación auricular en pacientes con COVID-19. Utilidad de la puntuación CHA2DS2-VASc: un análisis del registro internacional HOPE COVID-19.

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.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with COVID-19. Usefulness of the CHA2DS2-VASc score: an analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 registry.

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.

Gender Differences in the Presentation and Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

Gender-related differences in COVID-19 clinical presentation, disease progression, and mortality have not been adequately explored. We analyzed the clinical profile, presentation, treatments, and outcomes of patients according to gender in the HOPE-COVID-19 International Registry. Among 2,798 enrolled patients, 1,111 were women (39.7%). Male patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and more comorbidities at baseline. After propensity score matching, 876 men and 876 women were selected. Male patients more often reported fever, whereas female patients more often reported vomiting, diarrhea, and hyposmia/anosmia. Laboratory tests in men presented alterations consistent with a more severe COVID-19 infection (eg, significantly higher C-reactive protein, troponin, transaminases, lymphocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, and ferritin). Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, bilateral pneumonia, respiratory insufficiency, and renal failure were significantly more frequent in men. Men more often required pronation, corticosteroids, and tocilizumab administration. A significantly higher 30-day mortality was observed in men vs women (23.4% vs 19.2%; P = .039). Trial Numbers: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Impact of smoking on COVID-19 outcomes: a HOPE Registry subanalysis.

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.

Clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and outcome of young patients admitted for COVID-19, with respect to the elderly counterpart.

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.

Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID 19 international registry (HOPE COVID-19), rationale and design.

The disease produced by the new coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2), named COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease-2019) has recently been classified as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, scarce clinical data is available and generally limited to the Chinese population due to the first cases were identified in Wuhan (Hubei, China).This article describes the rationale and design of the HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID 19) registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04334291). With an ambispective cohort design, eligible patients are those discharged, deceased or alive, from any hospital center with a confirmed diagnosis or a COVID-19 high suspicion. With a current recruitment of more than 7000 cases, in 46 hospitals in 8 countries, since it is not possible to estimate the sample size based on literature reports, the investigators will try to get the maximum numbers of patients possible. The study primary objective is all cause mortality and aims to characterize the clinical profile of patients infected in order to develop a prognostic clinical score allowing, rapid logistic decision making. As secondary objectives, the analysis of other clinical events, the risk-adjusted influence of treatments and previous comorbidities of patients infected with the disease will be performed.The results of HOPE COVID-19 will contribute to a better understanding of this condition. We aim to describe the management of this condition as well as the outcomes in relation to the therapy chosen, in order to gain insight into improving patient care in the coming months. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04334291.

Coronary artery aneurysms, insights from the international coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR).

BACKGROUND: Coronary Aneurysms are a focal dilatation of an artery segment >1.5-fold the normal size of adjacent segments. Although some series have suggested a prevalence of 0.3-12%, data are lacking. In addition, they are not mentioned in practice guidelines. Our aim was investigate its prevalence, management and long-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR) involved 32 hospitals across 9 countries in America and Europe. We reviewed 436,467 consecutive angiograms performed over the period 2004-2016. Finally, 1565 patients were recruited. Aneurysm global prevalence was 0.35%. Most patients were male (78.5%) with a mean age of 65 years and frequent cardiovascular risk factors. The main indication for angiogram was an acute coronary syndrome, 966 cases. The number of aneurisms was ≤2 per patient in 95.8% of the cases, mostly saccular, most frequently found in the left anterior descending and with numbers proportional with coronary stenosis. Aortopathies were related with more aneurysms too. Most patients received any revascularization procedure (69%), commonly percutaneous (53%). After a median follow-up of 37.2 months, 485 suffered a combined event (MACE) and 240 died. Without major differences comparing CABG vs PCI, MACE and death were more frequent in patients who received bare metal stents. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary artery aneurysms are not uncommon. Usually, they are associated with coronary stenosis and high cardiovascular risk. Antiplatelet therapy seems reasonable and a percutaneous approach is safe and effective.

Estudio fisiológico invasivo para evaluar lesiones coronarias

Introducción: La revascularización mediante intervención coronaria percutánea con colocación de stent, o cirugía de derivación coronaria, alivia la isquemia miocárdica. Sin embargo, las pruebas de estrés no invasivas y la angiografía coronaria no siempre proporcionan la información adecuada sobre la importancia funcional de las estenosis en las arterias coronarias. Objetivo: Describir las recomendaciones actuales de la literatura médica con respecto a la fisiología coronaria en la cardiopatía isquémica. Desarrollo: El índice de reserva fraccional de flujo se considera el estándar de oro para detectar la isquemia miocárdica. Su naturaleza invasiva se equilibra con la resolución espacial inigualable y su relación lineal con el flujo sanguíneo máximo. Los resultados clínicos de pacientes cuya estrategia de revascularización se basa en mediciones de reserva fraccional de flujo son decisivos en varios subconjuntos de diferentes lesiones. En la última década se ha propuesto la evaluación de la gravedad de la estenosis coronaria mediante índices no hiperémicos. Sin embargo, la precisión de estos índices para distinguir correctamente la isquemia miocárdica es solo del 80 %. Conclusiones: Actualmente, la hiperemia máxima se recomienda para una óptima toma de decisiones sobre la revascularización.

Introduction: Revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting, or coronary bypass surgery, alleviates myocardial ischemia. However, noninvasive stress testing and angiography do not always provide adequate information on the functional significance of coronary artery stenoses. Objective: To describe the recommendations of the medical literature regarding coronary physiology in ischemic heart disease. Development: The fractional flow reserve index is considered the gold standard for detecting myocardial ischemia. Its invasive nature is balanced by unmatched spatial resolution and its linear relationship to peak blood flow. The clinical outcomes of patients whose revascularization strategy is based on fractional flow reserve measurements are decisive in several subsets of other lesions. In the last decade, assessment of coronary stenosis severity by non-hyperemic indices has been proposed; however, the accuracy of these indices to correctly distinguish myocardial ischemia does not exceed 80%. Conclusions: Currently, maximal hyperemia is recommended for optimal revascularization decision making.

La epidemiología de la hipertensión pulmonar / The epidemiology of pulmonary hypertension

Desde las perspectivas actuales, la hipertensión pulmonar es considerada un importante problema sanitario. El objetivo del artículo fue identificar las características epidemiológicas e historia natural de la hipertensión pulmonar en el contexto internacional y principalmente en la región americana. El conocimiento de la epidemiología de la hipertensión pulmonar ha experimentado un notable desarrollo con los resultados de los registros americanos, franceses, suizos, entre otros. Reportes iniciales consideraban que la enfermedad afectaba a pacientes jóvenes (edad promedio 36 años), siendo casi dos veces más frecuente en mujeres que en varones (1,7:1) y con una incidencia de 1-2 casos/1 000 000 habitantes/año y afecta a todos los grupos etarios. Las estimaciones actuales sugieren una prevalencia alrededor del 1 por ciento de la población mundial y aumenta hasta el 10 por ciento en los mayores de 65 años. La enfermedad auricular o ventricular izquierda y las enfermedades pulmonares son la causa más frecuente de hipertensión pulmonar. En Cuba no hay datos epidemiológicos disponibles sobre esta entidad. Los programas que ayuden a su conocimiento por la población médica se deben reforzar e impulsar un registro único de datos(AU)

From current perspectives, pulmonary hypertension is considered a major health problem. The present work was carried out to identify the epidemiological characteristics and natural history of pulmonary hypertension in the international context and mainly in the Americas. Knowledge of the epidemiology of pulmonary hypertension has undergone a remarkable development with the results of the American, French, and Swiss registries, among others. Initial reports considered that the disease affected young patients (average age 36 years), being almost twice more frequent in women than in men (1.7:1) and with an incidence of 1-2 cases/1,000,000 inhabitants/ year and affects all age groups. Current estimates suggest a prevalence around 1 percent of the world population and increases to 10 percent in those over 65 years of age. Left atrial or left ventricular disease and pulmonary diseases are the most common cause of pulmonary hypertension. In Cuba there are no epidemiological data available on this entity. The programs that help their knowledge by the medical population must be reinforced and promote a single data registry(AU)