Impact of First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic on Mortality at Emergency Department in Older Patients with COVID and Non-COVID Diagnoses.

INTRODUCTION: Mortality in emergency departments (EDs) is not well known. This study aimed to assess the impact of the first-wave pandemic on deaths accounted in the ED of older patients with COVID and non-COVID diseases. METHODS: We used data from the Emergency Department and Elderly Needs (EDEN) cohort (pre-COVID period) and from the EDEN-COVID cohort (COVID period) that included all patients ≥65 years seen in 52 Spanish EDs from April 1 to 7, 2019, and March 30 to April 5, 2020, respectively. We recorded patient characteristics and final destination at ED. We compared older patients in the pre-COVID period, with older patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19. ED-mortality (before discharge or hospitalization) is the prior outcome and is expressed as an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% interval confidence. RESULTS: We included 23,338 older patients from the pre-COVID period (aged 78.3 [8.1] years), 6,715 patients with non-COVID conditions (aged 78.9 [8.2] years) and 3,055 with COVID (aged 78.3 [8.3] years) from the COVID period. Compared to the older patients, pre-COVID period, patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19 were more often male, referred by a doctor and by ambulance, with more comorbidity and disability, dementia, nursing home, and more risk according to qSOFA, respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to the pre-COVID period, patients with non-COVID and with COVID-19 were more often to be hospitalized from ED (24.8% vs. 44.3% vs. 79.1%) and were more often to die in ED (0.6% vs. 1.2% vs. 2.2%), respectively (p < 0.001). Compared to the pre-COVID period, aOR for age, sex, comorbidity and disability, ED mortality in elderly patients cared in ED during the COVID period was 2.31 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.76-3.06), and 3.75 (95% CI: 2.77-5.07) for patients with COVID. By adding the variable qSOFA to the model, such OR were 1.59 (95% CI: 1.11-2.30) and 2.16 (95% CI: 1.47-3.17), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: During the early first pandemic wave of COVID-19, more complex and life-threatening older with COVID and non-COVID diseases were seen compared to the pre-COVID period. In addition, the need for hospitalization and the ED mortality doubled in non-COVID and tripled in COVID diagnosis. This increase in ED mortality is not only explained by the complexity or severity of the elderly patients but also because of the system's overload.

Impact of dementia on 30-, 180-, and 365-day mortality during the first pandemic wave in older adults seen in spanish emergency departments diagnosed with or without COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether dementia is an independent predictor of death after a hospital emergency department (ED) visit by older adults with or without a COVID-19 diagnosis during the first pandemic wave. METHOD: We used data from the EDEN-Covid (Emergency Department and Elderly Needs during Covid) cohort formed by all patients ≥65 years seen in 52 Spanish EDs from March 30 to April 5, 2020. The association of prior history of dementia with mortality at 30, 180 and 365 d was evaluated in the overall sample and according to a COVID-19 or non COVID diagnosis. RESULTS: We included 9,770 patients aged 78.7 ± 8.3 years, 51.1% men, 1513 (15.5%) subjects with prior history of dementia and 3055 (31.3%) with COVID-19 diagnosis. 1399 patients (14.3%) died at 30 d, 2008 (20.6%) at 180 days and 2456 (25.1%) at 365 d. The adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR) for age, sex, comorbidity, disability and diagnosis for death associated with dementia were 1.16 (95% CI 1.01-1.34) at 30 d; 1.15 at 180 d (95% CI 1.03-1.30) and 1.19 at 365 d (95% CI 1.07-1.32), p < .001. In patients with COVID-19, the aHR were 1.26 (95% CI: 1.04-1.52) at 30 days; 1.29 at 180 d (95% CI: 1.09-1.53) and 1.35 at 365 d (95% CI: 1.15-1.58). CONCLUSION: Dementia in older adults attending Spanish EDs during the first pandemic wave was independently associated with 30-, 180- and 365-day mortality. This impact was lower when adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity and disability, and was greater in patients diagnosed with COVID-19.

Effect of Flu Vaccination on Severity and Outcome of Heart Failure Decompensations.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship of seasonal flu vaccination with the severity of decompensation and long-term outcomes of patients with heart failure (HF). METHODS: We analyzed 6147 consecutively enrolled patients with decompensated HF who presented to 33 Spanish emergency departments (EDs) during January and February of 2018 and 2019, grouped according to seasonal flu vaccination status. The severity of HF decompensation was assessed by the Multiple Estimation of Risk Based on the Emergency Department Spanish Score in Patients With Acute Heart Failure (MEESSI-AHF) + MEESSI scale, need of hospitalization and in-hospital all-cause mortality. The long-term outcomes analyzed were 90-day postdischarge adverse events and 90-day all-cause death. Associations between vaccination, HF decompensation severity and long-term outcomes were explored by unadjusted and adjusted logistic and Cox regressions by using 14 covariables that could act as potential confounders. RESULTS: Overall median (IQR) age was 84 (IQR = 77-89) years, and 56% were women. Vaccinated patients (n = 1139; 19%) were older, had more comorbidities and had worse baseline status, as assessed by New York Heart Association class and Barthel index, than did unvaccinated patients (n = 5008; 81%). Infection triggering decompensation was more common in vaccinated patients (50% vs 41%; P < 0.001). In vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, high or very-high risk decompensation was seen in 21.9% and 21.1%; hospitalization occurred in 72.5% and 73.7%; in-hospital mortality was 7.4% and 7.0%; 90-day postdischarge adverse events were 57.4% and 53.2%; and the 90-day mortality rate was 15.8% and 16.6%, respectively, with no significant differences between cohorts. After adjusting, vaccinated decompensated patients with HF had decreased odds for hospitalization (OR = 0.823, 95%CI = 0.709-0.955). CONCLUSION: In patients with HF, seasonal flu vaccination is associated with less severe decompensations.

Influence of Meteorological Temperature and Pressure on the Severity of Heart Failure Decompensations.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure (AP) and the severity of heart failure (HF) decompensations. METHODS: We analysed patients coming from the Epidemioloy Acute Heart Failure Emergency (EAHFE) Registry, a multicentre prospective cohort study enrolling patients diagnosed with decompensated HF in 26 emergency departments (EDs) of 16 Spanish cities. We recorded patient and demographic data and maximum temperature (Tmax) and AP (APmax) the day before ED consultation. Associations between temperature and AP and severity endpoints were explored by logistic regression. We used restricted cubic splines to model continuous non-linear associations of temperature and AP with each endpoint. RESULTS: We analysed 16,545 patients. Daily Tmax and APmax (anomaly) of the day before patient ED arrival ranged from 0.8 to 41.6° and from - 61.7 to 69.9 hPa, respectively. A total of 12,352 patients (75.2%) were hospitalised, with in-hospital mortality in 1171 (7.1%). The probability of hospitalisation by HF decompensation showed a U-shaped curve versus Tmax and an increasing trend versus APmax. Regarding temperature, hospitalisation significantly increased from 20 °C (reference) upwards (25 °C: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.04-1.21; 40 °C: 1.65, 1.13-2.40) and below 5.4 °C (5 °C: 1.21, 1.01-1.46). Concerning the mean AP of the city (anomaly = 0 hPa), hospitalisation increased when APmax (anomaly) was above + 7.0 hPa (atmospheric anticyclone; + 10 hPa: 1.14, 1.05-1.24; + 30 hPa: 2.02. 1.35-3.03). The lowest probability of mortality also corresponded to cold-mild temperatures and low AP, with a significant increased risk only found for Tmax above 24.3 °C (25 °C: 1.13, 1.01-1.27; 40 °C: 2.05, 1.15-3.64) and APmax (anomaly) above + 3.4 hPa (+ 10 hPa: 1.21, 1.07-1.36; + 30 hPa: 1.73, 1.06-2.81). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the main analysis results. CONCLUSION: Temperature and AP are independently associated with the severity of HF decompensations, with possible different effects on the need for hospitalisation and in-hospital mortality.

Hyperkalemia in acute heart failure: Short term outcomes from the EAHFE registry.

OBJECTIVE: Both hyperkalemia (HK) and Acute Heart Failure (AHF) are associated with increased short-term mortality, and the management of either may exacerbate the other. As the relationship between HK and AHF is poorly described, our purpose was to determine the relationship between HK and short-term outcomes in Emergency Department (ED) AHF. METHODS: The EAHFE Registry enrolls all ED AHF patients from 45 Spanish ED and records in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes. Our primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital death, with secondary outcomes of prolonged hospitalization (>7 days) and 7-day post-discharge adverse events (ED revisit, hospitalization, or death). Associations between serum potassium (sK) and outcomes were explored using logistic regression by restricted cubic spline (RCS) curves, with sK =4.0 mEq/L as the reference, adjusting by age, sex, comorbidities, patient baseline status and chronic treatments. Interaction analyses were performed for the primary outcome. RESULTS: Of 13,606 ED AHF patients, the median (IQR) age was 83 (76-88) years, 54% were women, and the median (IQR) sK was 4.5 mEq/L (4.3-4.9) with a range of 4.0-9.9 mEq/L. In-hospital mortality was 7.7%, with prolonged hospitalization in 35.9%, and a 7-day post-discharge adverse event rate of 8.7%. Adjusted in-hospital mortality increased steadily from sK ≥4.8 (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.01-1.80) to sK = 9.9 (8.41, 3.60-19.6). Non-diabetics with elevated sK had higher odds of death, while chronic treatment with mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists exhibited a mixed effect. Neither prolonged hospitalization nor post-discharge adverse events was associated with sK. CONCLUSION: In ED AHF, initial sK >4.8 mEq/L was independently associated with in-hospital mortality, suggesting that this cohort may benefit from aggressive HK treatment.

Are there differences in the relationship between respiratory rate and oxygen saturation between patients with COVID-19 and those without COVID-19? Insights from a cohort-based correlational study.

BACKGROUND: Physicians have observed patients with COVID-19 without respiratory distress despite marked hypoxaemia and extensive radiographic abnormalities, a controversial phenomenon called 'silent hypoxaemia'. We aimed to compare the relationship between RR and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) in patients with COVID-19 versus patients without COVID-19 when breathing air on admission. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicentre ED cohort correlational study.We used the Spanish Investigators on Emergency Situations TeAm network cohort of patients with COVID-19 admitted to 61 Spanish EDs between March and April 2020. The non-COVID-19 cohort included patients with lower respiratory tract bacterial infections admitted between January 2016 and April 2018.We built a multivariable linear model to investigate the independent predictive factors related to RR and a logistic multivariate regression model to analyse the presence of 'silent hypoxaemia'. RESULTS: We included 1094 patients with COVID-19 and 477 patients without COVID-19. On admission, RR was lower (20±7 vs 24±8/min, p<0.0001), while SpO2 higher (95±5% vs 90±7%, p<0.0001) in patients with COVID-19 versus patients without COVID-19. RR was negatively associated with SpO2 (RR decreasing with increasing age, beta=-0.37, 95% CI (-0.43; -0.31), p<0.0001), positively associated with age (RR increasing with increasing age, beta=0.05, 95% CI (0.03; 0.07), p<0.0001) and negatively associated with COVID-19 status (RR lower in patients with COVID-19, beta=-1.90, 95% CI (-2.65; -1.15), p<0.0001). The negative RR/SpO2 correlation differed between patients with COVID-19 aged <80 and ≥80 years old (p=0.04). Patients with COVID-19 aged ≥80 years old had lower RR than patients without COVID-19 aged ≥80 years old at SpO2 values <95% (22±7 vs 24±8/min, p=0.004). 'Silent hypoxaemia' defined as RR <20/min with SpO2 <95% was observed in 162 (14.8%) patients with COVID-19 and in 79 (16.6%) patients without COVID-19 (p=0.4). 'Silent hypoxaemia' was associated with age ≥80 years (OR=1.01 (1.01; 1.03), p<0.0001) but not with gender, comorbidities and COVID-19 status. CONCLUSION: The RR/SpO2 relationship before oxygen administration does not differ between patients with COVID-19 and those without COVID-19, except in elderly patients.

Impact of the MEESSI-AHF tool to guide disposition decision-making in patients with acute heart failure in the emergency department: a before-and-after study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of risk stratification using the MEESSI-AHF (Multiple Estimation of risk based on the Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with acute heart failure) scale to guide disposition decision-making on the outcomes of ED patients with acute heart failure (AHF), and assess the adherence of emergency physicians to risk stratification recommendations. METHODS: This was a prospective quasi-experimental study (before/after design) conducted in eight Spanish EDs which consecutively enrolled adult patients with AHF. In the pre-implementation stage, the admit/discharge decision was performed entirely based on emergency physician judgement. During the post-implementation phase, emergency physicians were advised to 'discharge' patients classified by the MEESSI-AHF scale as low risk and 'admit' patients classified as increased risk. Nonetheless, the final decision was left to treating emergency physicians. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were days alive and out of hospital, in-hospital mortality and 30-day post-discharge combined adverse event (ED revisit, hospitalisation or death). RESULTS: The pre-implementation and post-implementation cohorts included 1589 and 1575 patients, respectively (median age 85 years, 56% females) with similar characteristics, and 30-day all-cause mortality was 9.4% and 9.7%, respectively (post-implementation HR=1.03, 95% CI=0.82 to 1.29). There were no differences in secondary outcomes or in the percentage of patients entirely managed in the ED without hospitalisation (direct discharge from the ED, 23.5% vs 24.4%, OR=1.05, 95% CI=0.89 to 1.24). Adjusted models did not change these results. Emergency physicians followed the MEESSI-AHF-based recommendation on patient disposition in 70.9% of cases (recommendation over-ruling: 29.1%). Physicians were more likely to over-rule the recommendation when 'discharge' was recommended (56.4%; main reason: need for hospitalisation for a second diagnosis) than when 'admit' was recommended (12.8%; main reason: no appreciation of severity of AHF decompensation by emergency physician), with an OR for over-ruling the 'discharge' compared with the 'admit' recommendation of 8.78 (95% CI=6.84 to 11.3). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the MEESSI-AHF risk stratification tool in the ED to guide disposition decision-making did not improve patient outcomes.

Incidence, clinical, risk factors and outcomes of Guillain-Barré in Covid-19.

We diagnosed 11 Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases among 71,904 COVID patients attended at 61 Spanish emergency departments (EDs) during the 2-month pandemic peak. The relative frequency of GBS among ED patients was higher in COVID (0.15‰) than non-COVID (0.02‰) patients (odds ratio [OR] = 6.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.18-12.5), as was the standardized incidence (9.44 and 0.69 cases/100,000 inhabitant-years, respectively, OR = 13.5, 95% CI = 9.87-18.4). Regarding clinical characteristics, olfactory-gustatory disorders were more frequent in COVID-GBS than non-COVID-GBS (OR = 27.59, 95% CI = 1.296-587) and COVID-non-GBS (OR = 7.875, 95% CI = 1.587-39.09) patients. Although COVID-GBS patients were more frequently admitted to intensive care, mortality was not increased versus control groups. Our results suggest SARS-CoV-2 could be another viral infection causing GBS. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:598-603.

Incidence, Clinical Characteristics, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients With COVID-19: Results of the UMC-19-S12.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who were attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with UGB in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without UGB (control group A) and non-COVID-19 patients with UGB (control group B). Fifty-three independent variables and 4 outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 83 UGB in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 who were attending EDs (1.11%, 95% CI=0.88-1.38). This incidence was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients [2474/1,388,879, 1.78%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.71-1.85; odds ratio (OR)=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77]. Clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 patients presenting with UGB were abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, dyspnea, expectoration, melena, fever, cough, chest pain, and dysgeusia. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with UGB, COVID-19 patients with UGB more frequently had fever, cough, expectoration, dyspnea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, interstitial lung infiltrates, and ground-glass lung opacities. They underwent fewer endoscopies in the ED (although diagnoses did not differ between cases and control group B) and less endoscopic treatment. After adjustment for age and sex, cases showed a higher in-hospital all-cause mortality than control group B (OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.09-3.86) but not control group A (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.59-2.19) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of UGB in COVID-19 patients attending EDs was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients. Digestive symptoms predominated over respiratory symptoms, and COVID-19 patients with UGB underwent fewer gastroscopies and endoscopic treatments than the general population with UGB. In-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients with UGB was increased compared with non-COVID patients with UGB, but not compared with the remaining COVID-19 patients.

Pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19: incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcome.

AIMS: We investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (EDs), before hospitalization. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with PE in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first COVID-19 outbreak. COVID-19 patients without PE and non-COVID-19 patients with PE were included as control groups. Adjusted comparisons for baseline characteristics, acute episode characteristics, and outcomes were made between cases and randomly selected controls (1:1 ratio). We identified 368 PE in 74 814 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (4.92‰). The standardized incidence of PE in the COVID-19 population resulted in 310 per 100 000 person-years, significantly higher than that observed in the non-COVID-19 population [35 per 100 000 person-years; odds ratio (OR) 8.95 for PE in the COVID-19 population, 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.51-9.41]. Several characteristics in COVID-19 patients were independently associated with PE, the strongest being D-dimer >1000 ng/mL, and chest pain (direct association) and chronic heart failure (inverse association). COVID-19 patients with PE differed from non-COVID-19 patients with PE in 16 characteristics, most directly related to COVID-19 infection; remarkably, D-dimer >1000 ng/mL, leg swelling/pain, and PE risk factors were significantly less present. PE in COVID-19 patients affected smaller pulmonary arteries than in non-COVID-19 patients, although right ventricular dysfunction was similar in both groups. In-hospital mortality in cases (16.0%) was similar to COVID-19 patients without PE (16.6%; OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65-1.42; and 11.4% in a subgroup of COVID-19 patients with PE ruled out by scanner, OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.97-2.27), but higher than in non-COVID-19 patients with PE (6.5%; OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.66-4.51). Adjustment for differences in baseline and acute episode characteristics and sensitivity analysis reported very similar associations. CONCLUSIONS: PE in COVID-19 patients at ED presentation is unusual (about 0.5%), but incidence is approximately ninefold higher than in the general (non-COVID-19) population. Moreover, risk factors and leg symptoms are less frequent, D-dimer increase is lower and emboli involve smaller pulmonary arteries. While PE probably does not increase the mortality of COVID-19 patients, mortality is higher in COVID-19 than in non-COVID-19 patients with PE.

Incidence, Clinical Characteristics, Risk Factors and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With COVID-19: Results of the UMC-19-S1010.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of knowledge about the real incidence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with COVID-19, their clinical characteristics, and their prognoses. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of ACS in patients with COVID-19 in the emergency department. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with ACS in 62 Spanish emergency departments between March and April 2020 (the first wave of COVID-19). We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without ACS (control A) and non-COVID-19 patients with ACS (control B). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and control subjects were performed regarding 58 characteristics and outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 110 patients with ACS in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED (1.48% [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.21-1.78%]). This incidence was lower than that observed in non-COVID-19 patients (3.64% [95% CI 3.54-3.74%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.40 [95% CI 0.33-0.49]). The clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 associated with a higher risk of presenting ACS were: previous coronary artery disease, age ≥60 years, hypertension, chest pain, raised troponin, and hypoxemia. The need for hospitalization and admission to intensive care and in-hospital mortality were higher in cases than in control group A (adjusted OR [aOR] 6.36 [95% CI 1.84-22.1], aOR 4.63 [95% CI 1.88-11.4], and aOR 2.46 [95% CI 1.15-5.25]). When comparing cases with control group B, the aOR of admission to intensive care was 0.41 (95% CI 0.21-0.80), while the aOR for in-hospital mortality was 5.94 (95% CI 2.84-12.4). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of ACS in patients with COVID-19 attending the emergency department was low, around 1.48%, but could be increased in some circumstances. Patients with COVID-19 with ACS had a worse prognosis than control subjects with higher in-hospital mortality.

A case-control, multicentre study of consecutive patients with COVID-19 and acute (myo)pericarditis: incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of acute (myo)pericarditis (AMP) in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Case-control, retrospective review, consecutive case inclusion performed in 62 Spanish EDs. All COVID-19 patients with AMP (cases) were compared in clinical characteristics and outcomes with COVID-19 without AMP (control group A) and non-COVID patients with AMP (control group B). We estimated unadjusted standardised incidence (SI, not adjusted by population's age/sex) of AMP in COVID-19 and non-COVID populations (per 100 000/year). RESULTS: We identified 67 AMP in COVID-19 patients (SI=56.5, OR with respect to non-COVID patients=4.43, 95% CI=3.98 to 4.94). Remarkably, COVID-19 cases presented with chest pain less frequently than non-COVID patients and had less typical ECG changes, higher NT-proBNP (N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide), more left and right ventricular dysfunction in echocardiography and more need of inotropic/vasopressor drugs. Admission to intensive care was higher than control group A (OR=3.22, 95% CI=1.43 to 7.23), and in-hospital mortality was higher than control group B (OR=7.75, 95% CI=2.77 to 21.7). CONCLUSION: AMP is unusual as a form of COVID-19 presentation (about 1‰ cases), but SI is more than fourfold higher than non-COVID population, and it is less symptomatic, more severe and has higher in-hospital mortality; therefore, rapid recognition, echocardiographic assessment of myopericardial inflammation/dysfunction and treatment with vasoactive drugs when needed are recommended in AMP in patients with COVID-19.

Safety and Revisit Related to Discharge the Sixty-one Spanish Emergency Department Medical Centers Without Hospitalization in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia. A Prospective Cohort Study UMC-Pneumonia COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). METHODS: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom weredischarged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176 3.037), age < 60 years (aOR 2.324; 95%CI 1.353-3.990), and lymphocyte count > 1200/mm3 (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A totalof 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). CONCLUSION: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality.

Incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes of meningoencephalitis in patients with COVID-19.

We investigated the incidence, clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcome of meningoencephalitis (ME) in patients with COVID-19 attending emergency departments (ED), before hospitalization. We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with ME in 61 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-ME) during the COVID pandemic. We formed two control groups: non-COVID patients with ME (non-COVID-ME) and COVID patients without ME (COVID-non-ME). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 57 baseline and clinical characteristics and 4 outcomes. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical and serologic findings of COVID-ME and non-COVID-ME were also investigated. We identified 29 ME in 71,904 patients with COVID-19 attending EDs (0.40‰, 95%CI=0.27-0.58). This incidence was higher than that observed in non-COVID patients (150/1,358,134, 0.11‰, 95%CI=0.09-0.13; OR=3.65, 95%CI=2.45-5.44). With respect to non-COVID-ME, COVID-ME more frequently had dyspnea and chest X-ray abnormalities, and neck stiffness was less frequent (OR=0.3, 95%CI=0.1-0.9). In 69.0% of COVID-ME, CSF cells were predominantly lymphocytes, and SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected by RT-PCR in 1 patient. The clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of presenting ME in COVID patients were vomiting (OR=3.7, 95%CI=1.4-10.2), headache (OR=24.7, 95%CI=10.2-60.1), and altered mental status (OR=12.9, 95%CI=6.6-25.0). COVID-ME patients had a higher in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients (OR=2.26; 95%CI=1.04-4.48), and a higher need for hospitalization (OR=8.02; 95%CI=1.19-66.7) and intensive care admission (OR=5.89; 95%CI=3.12-11.14) than COVID-non-ME patients. ME is an unusual form of COVID presentation (<0.5‰ cases), but is more than 4-fold more frequent than in non-COVID patients attending the ED. As the majority of these MEs had lymphocytic predominance and in one patient SARS-CoV-2 antigen was detected in CSF, SARS-CoV-2 could be the cause of most of the cases observed. COVID-ME patients had a higher unadjusted in-hospital mortality than non-COVID-ME patients.

Cardiac troponins: 25 years on the stage and still improving their clinical value.

Twenty-five years ago, non-isotopic immunoassays for measuring the cardiac specific isoforms of troponin I (cTnI) and T (cTnT) were developed. Both biomarkers radically changed the diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy indication of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and, particularly, of myocardial infarction (MI). However, cardiac troponins (cTn) rapidly demonstrated their usefulness in other cardiac and non-cardiac conditions, a part of the ischemic coronary diseases. Consequently, the number of patients to be tested for cTn and the number of tests requested to clinical laboratories sharply increased. Though the manufacturers continuously improved the analytical characteristics of the first cTn assays and produced different cTn assay "generations", the universal definition of myocardial infarction required less-than-available analytical imprecision at the cTn concentration used to assess MI (i.e. the 99th reference percentile). To address the clinical requirements, manufacturers developed the high-sensitivity cTn (hs-cTn) assays that allow to measure the 99th reference percentile with adequate precision, to detect cTn in many healthy subjects and, hence, to calculate the hs-cTn biological variation and especially to observe in very short time intervals serial differences in hs-cTn attributable to cardiac ischemia. Since the number of patients attending the emergency departments (ED) for a suspected ACS or MI is increasing, the improved properties of hs-cTn assays, allowing faster and safer patient assessment, will help to alleviate the sometimes overcrowded EDs. However, there are many biological, analytical, and clinical factors that can influence the true hs-cTn values of a patient. Clinicians and laboratory professionals should know about them for the best interpretation of the otherwise largely useful hs-cTn measurements. In conclusion, 25 years after their introduction for clinical use, "cTn are still on the stage and improving their clinical value".

Combining loop with thiazide diuretics in patients discharged home after a heart failure decompensation: Association with 30-day outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of the addition of thiazide diuretic on top of loop diuretic and standard of care with short-term outcomes of patients discharged after surviving an acute heart failure (AHF) episode. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of 14,403 patients from three independent cohorts representing the main departments involved in AHF treatment for whom treatment at discharge was recorded and included loop diuretics. Patients were divided according to whether treatment included or not thiazide diuretics. Short-term outcomes consisted of 30-day all-cause mortality, hospitalization (with a separate analysis for hospitalization due to AHF or to other causes) and the combination of death and hospitalization. The association between thiazide diuretics on short-term outcomes was explored by Cox regression and expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with 95 % confidence intervals, which were adjusted for 18 patient-related variables and 9 additional drugs (aside from loop and thiazide diuretics) prescribed at discharge. RESULTS: The median age was 81 (interquartile range=73-86) years, 53 % were women, and patients were mainly discharged from the cardiology (42 %), internal medicine or geriatric department (29 %) and emergency department (19 %). There were 1,367 patients (9.5 %) discharged with thiazide and loop diuretics, while the rest (13,036; 90.5 %) were discharged with only loop diuretics on top of the remaining standard of care treatments. The combination of thiazide and loop diuretics showed a neutral effect on all outcomes: death (adjusted HR 1.149, 0.850-1.552), hospitalization (0.898, 0.770-1.048; hospitalization due to AHF 0.799, 0.599-1.065; hospitalization due to other causes 1.136, 0.756-1.708) and combined event (0.934, 0.811-1.076). CONCLUSION: The combination of thiazide and loop diuretics was not associated with changes in risk of death, hospitalization or a combination of both.

Association of intravenous digoxin use in acute heart failure with rapid atrial fibrillation and short-term mortality according to patient age, renal function, and serum potassium.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous digoxin is still used in emergency departments (EDs) to treat patients with acute heart failure (AHF), especially in those with rapid atrial fibrillation. Nonetheless, many emergency physicians are reluctant to use intravenous digoxin in patients with advanced age, impaired renal function, and potassium disturbances due to its potential capacity to increase adverse outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether intravenous digoxin used to treat rapid atrial fibrillation in patients with AHF may influence mortality in patients with specific age, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and serum potassium classes. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of patients included in in the Spanish EAHFE cohort, which includes patients diagnosed with AHF in the ED. SETTING: 45 Spanish EDs. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand one hundred ninety-four patients with AHF and rapid atrial fibrillation (heart rate ≥100 bpm) not receiving digoxin at home, divided according to whether they were or were not treated with intravenous digoxin in the ED. OUTCOME: The relationships between age, eGFR, and potassium with 30-day mortality were investigated using restricted cubic spline (RCS) models adjusted for relevant patient and episode variables. The impact of digoxin use on such relationships was assessed by checking interaction. MAIN RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 82 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 76-87], 61.4% were women, 65.2% had previous episodes of atrial fibrillation, and the median heart rate at ED arrival was 120 bpm (IQR = 109-135). Digoxin and no digoxin groups were formed by 864 (39.4%) and 1330 (60.6%) patients, respectively. There were 191 deaths within the 30-day follow-up period (8.9%), with no differences between patients receiving or not receiving digoxin (8.5 vs. 9.1%, P  = 0.636). Although analysis of RCS curves showed that death was associated with advanced age, worse renal function, and hypo- and hyperkalemia, use of intravenous digoxin did not interact with any of these relationships ( P  = 0.156 for age, P  = 0.156 for eGFR; P  = 0.429 for potassium). CONCLUSION: The use of intravenous digoxin in the ED was not associated with significant changes in 30-day mortality, which was confirmed irrespective of patient age or the existence of renal dysfunction or serum potassium disturbances.

Effect of seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccination on severity and long-term outcomes of patients with heart failure decompensations.

AIMS: To investigate whether seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations influence the severity of decompensations and long-term outcomes of patients with acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We included consecutive AHF patients attended at 40 Spanish emergency departments during November and December 2022. They were grouped according to whether they had received seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccination. The severity of heart failure (HF) decompensation was assessed with the MEESSI scale, need for hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality. Long-term outcomes were 90-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. Associations between vaccination, HF decompensation severity, and long-term outcomes were investigated. Subgroup analyses were executed for 16 patient characteristics and their relationship with vaccination and 1-year mortality. We analysed 4243 patients (median age 85 years; interquartile range 77-90; 57% female): 1841 (43%) had received influenza vaccination, 3139 (74%) COVID-19 vaccination, 1773 (41.8%) received both vaccines (full vaccination) and 1036 (24.4%) none. Previous episodes of AHF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic treatment with diuretics were associated with vaccination (either influenza, COVID-19 and full vaccination). High or very-high risk decompensation occurred in 18.6%; hospitalization in 72.3%, ICU admission in 1.1%, and in-hospital mortality in 8.4%. Influenza vaccination was associated with lower hospitalization rates (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.746, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.636-0.876) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.761, 95% CI 0.583-0.992), while COVID-19 vaccination was associated with increased hospitalizations (OR 1.215, 95% CI 1.016-1.454). Overall, 90-day and 1-year mortality were 20.3% and 34.4%. Both were decreased in influenza-vaccinated patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.831, 95% CI 0.709-0.973; and HR 0.885, 95% CI 0.785-0.999, respectively) but only at 90 days in COVID-19 vaccinated patients (HR 0.829, 95% CI 0.702-0.980). Full vaccination achieved even greater reductions in in-hospital, 90-day, and 1-year mortality (HR 0.638, 95% CI 0.479-0.851; HR 0.702, 95% CI 0.592-0.833; and HR 0.815, 95% CI 0.713-0.931, respectively). Subgroup analysis based on patient-related characteristics demonstrated the consistence of vaccination with long-term survival. CONCLUSION: In HF patients, seasonal influenza vaccination appears to be associated with less severe decompensation and lower 1-year mortality, while no firm conclusions can be drawn from the results of the present study regarding the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination. Full vaccination is associated with the greatest reduction in short- and long-term mortality.

Factors associated with discharge home in older patients admitted to emergency department observation units: Looking for a predictive scale.

BACKGROUND: The selection of patients who are going to be admitted to an emergency department observation unit (EDOU) is essential for the good management of these units, intended fundamentally to avoid unnecessary hospitalization of patients. This is especially important when dealing with older patients. It would be important to know what factors are associated with discharge home and to have a clinical predictive scale that appropriately selects older patients who are going to be admitted to an EDOU. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted of all patients ≥65 years of age assisted in 48 Spanish Emergency Departments for 7 consecutive days and were admitted to the EDOU. Demographics-functional, vital signs data and initial laboratory results were analyzed to investigate its association with discharge home and develop and validate a prediction model for discharge home from EDOU. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to develop a prediction model, and a scoring system was created. RESULTS: Among 5457 patients admitted to the EDOU from the emergency room, 2508 (46%) patients were discharged home, and 2949 (54%) were admitted to the hospital. Five variables were strongly associated with discharge home: the absence of fever (adjusted OR: 3.61, 95% CI:1.53-8.54), Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 points (2.80, 1.63-4.82), absence of tachypnea (2.51, 1.74-3.64) or leukocytosis (2.07, 1.70-2.52) and oxygen saturation >94% (2.00, 1.64-2.43). The final model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.648 (IC95% = 0.627-0.668) in the development cohort and 0.635 (0.614-0.656) in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: There are factors associated with a greater probability of discharge home of older patients admitted to EDOUs. Prediction at the individual level remains elusive, as the best model obtained in this study did not have sufficient validity to be applied in the clinical setting.