Effectiveness of a cardiac rehabilitation program on biomechanical, imaging, and physiological biomarkers in elderly patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF): FUNNEL + study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have a low functional status, which in turn is a risk factor for hospital admission and an important predictor of survival in HFpEF. HFpFE is a heterogeneous syndrome and recent studies have suggested an important role for careful, pathophysiological-based phenotyping to improve patient characterization. Cardiac rehabilitation has proven to be a useful tool in the framework of secondary prevention in patients with HFpEF. Facilitating decision-making and implementing cardiac rehabilitation programs is a challenge in public health systems for HFpEF management. The FUNNEL + study proposes to evaluate the efficacy of an exercise and education-based cardiac rehabilitation program on biomechanical, physiological, and imaging biomarkers in patients with HFpEF. METHODS: A randomised crossover clinical trial is presented among people older than 70 years with a diagnosis of HFpEF. The experimental group will receive a cardiac rehabilitation intervention for 12 weeks. Participants in the control group will receive one educational session per week for 12 weeks on HFpEF complications, functional decline, and healthy lifestyle habits. VO2peak is the primary outcome. Biomechanical, imaging and physiological biomarkers will be assessed as secondary outcomes. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: Identifying objective functional parameters indicative of HFpEF and the subsequent development of functional level stratification based on functional impairment ("biomechanical phenotypes") may help clinicians identify cardiac rehabilitation responders and non-responders and make future clinical decisions. In this way, future pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, such as exercise, could be improved and tailored to improve quality of life and prognosis and reducing patients' hospital readmissions, thereby reducing healthcare costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05393362 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Nosocomial COVID-19: A Nationwide Spanish Study.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 is a highly contagious virus, and despite professionals' best efforts, nosocomial COVID-19 (NC) infections have been reported. This work aimed to describe differences in symptoms and outcomes between patients with NC and community-acquired COVID-19 (CAC) and to identify risk factors for severe outcomes among NC patients. METHODS: This is a nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study that analyzed patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. NC was defined as patients admitted for non-COVID-19 diseases with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test on the fifth day of hospitalization or later. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality (IHM). The secondary outcome was other COVID-19-related complications. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of the 23,219 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 1,104 (4.8%) were NC. Compared to CAC patients, NC patients were older (median 76 vs. 69 years; p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (median Charlson Comorbidity Index 5 vs. 3; p < 0.001), were less symptomatic (p < 0.001), and had normal chest X-rays more frequently (30.8% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for sex, age, dependence, COVID-19 wave, and comorbidities, NC was associated with lower risk of moderate/severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.87; p < 0.001) and higher risk of acute heart failure (aOR: 1.40; 1.12-1.72; p = 0.003), sepsis (aOR: 1.73; 1.33-2.54; p < 0.001), and readmission (aOR: 1.35; 1.03-1.83; p = 0.028). NC was associated with a higher case fatality rate (39.1% vs. 19.2%) in all age groups. IHM was significantly higher among NC patients (aOR: 2.07; 1.81-2.68; p < 0.001). Risk factors for increased IHM in NC patients were age, moderate/severe dependence, malignancy, dyspnea, moderate/severe ARDS, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and shock; odynophagia was associated with lower IHM. CONCLUSIONS: NC is associated with greater mortality and complications compared to CAC. Hospital strategies to prevent NC must be strengthened.

Differences in clinical features and mortality in very old unvaccinated patients (≥ 80 years) hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first and successive waves from the multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry (Spain).

BACKGROUND: Old age is one of the most important risk factors for severe COVID-19. Few studies have analyzed changes in the clinical characteristics and prognosis of COVID-19 among older adults before the availability of vaccines. This work analyzes differences in clinical features and mortality in unvaccinated very old adults during the first and successive COVID-19 waves in Spain. METHODS: This nationwide, multicenter, retrospective cohort study analyzes unvaccinated patients ≥ 80 years hospitalized for COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry). Patients were classified according to whether they were admitted in the first wave (March 1-June 30, 2020) or successive waves (July 1-December 31, 2020). The endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality, expressed as the case fatality rate (CFR). RESULTS: Of the 21,461 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 5,953 (27.7%) were ≥ 80 years (mean age [IQR]: 85.6 [82.3-89.2] years). Of them, 4,545 (76.3%) were admitted during the first wave and 1,408 (23.7%) during successive waves. Patients hospitalized in successive waves were older, had a greater Charlson Comorbidity Index and dependency, less cough and fever, and met fewer severity criteria at admission (qSOFA index, PO2/FiO2 ratio, inflammatory parameters). Significant differences were observed in treatments used in the first (greater use of antimalarials, lopinavir, and macrolides) and successive waves (greater use of corticosteroids, tocilizumab and remdesivir). In-hospital complications, especially acute respiratory distress syndrome and pneumonia, were less frequent in patients hospitalized in successive waves, except for heart failure. The CFR was significantly higher in the first wave (44.1% vs. 33.3%; -10.8%; p < 0.001) and was higher among patients ≥ 95 years (54.4% vs. 38.5%; -15.9%; p < 0.001). After adjustments to the model, the probability of death was 33% lower in successive waves (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.57-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality declined significantly between the first and successive waves in very old unvaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Spain. This decline could be explained by a greater availability of hospital resources and more effective treatments as the pandemic progressed, although other factors such as changes in SARS-CoV-2 virulence cannot be ruled out.

The Role of Heparin in Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome and Other Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19.

The therapeutic management and short-term consequences of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are well known. However, COVID-19 post-acute sequelae are less known and represent a public health problem worldwide. Patients with COVID-19 who present post-acute sequelae may display immune dysregulation, a procoagulant state, and persistent microvascular endotheliopathy that could trigger microvascular thrombosis. These elements have also been implicated in the physiopathology of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, a frequent sequela in post-COVID-19 patients. These mechanisms, directly associated with post-acute sequelae, might determine the thrombotic consequences of COVID-19 and the need for early anticoagulation therapy. In this context, heparin has several potential benefits, including immunomodulatory, anticoagulant, antiviral, pro-endothelial, and vascular effects, that could be helpful in the treatment of COVID-19 post-acute sequelae. In this article, we review the evidence surrounding the post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 and the potential benefits of the use of heparin, with a special focus on the treatment of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome.

COVID-19 in Older Patients: Assessment of Post-COVID-19 Sarcopenia.

(1) Background: Acute COVID-19 infections produce alterations in the skeletal muscle, leading to acute sarcopenia, but the medium- and long-term consequences are still unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate: (1) body composition; (2) muscle strength and the prevalence of sarcopenia; and (3) the relationship between muscle strength with symptomatic and functional evolution in older patients affected by/recovered from COVID-19; (2) Methods: A prospective, longitudinal study of patients aged ≥65 years who had suffered from COVID-19 infection between 1 March and 31 May 2020, as confirmed by PCR or subsequent seroconversion. Persistent symptoms, as well as anthropometric, clinical, and analytical characteristics, were analyzed at 3 and 12 months after infection. The degree of sarcopenia was determined by dynamometry and with SARC-F; (3) Results: 106 participants, aged 76.8 ± 7 years, were included. At 3 months postinfection, a high percentage of sarcopenic patients was found, especially among women and in those with hospitalization. At 12 months postinfection, this percentage had decreased, coinciding with a functional and symptomatic recovery, and the normalization of inflammatory parameters, especially interleukin-6 (4.7 ± 11.6 pg/mL vs. 1.5 ± 2.4 pg/mL, p < 0.05). The improvement in muscle strength was accompanied by significant weight gain (71.9 ± 12.1 kg vs. 74.7 ± 12.7 kg, p < 0.001), but not by an increase in lean mass (49.6 ± 10 vs. 49.9 ± 10, p 0.29); (4) Conclusions: Older COVID-19 survivors presented a functional, clinical, and muscular recovery 12 months postinfection. Even so, it is necessary to carry out comprehensive follow-ups and assessments that include aspects of nutrition and physical activity.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors for cardiovascular and renal protection: A treatment approach far beyond their glucose-lowering effect.

Findings from cardiovascular outcome trials on certain newer glucose-lowering drugs have shown clear cardiovascular and renal benefits. In this review, we provide an updated overview of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors in terms of cardiovascular and renal protection. Both drugs have been described as diabetes/disease-modifying drugs. There is robust evidence on the benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists in renal disease and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-especially in stroke-which are mainly explained by their antiproteinuric effect. However, this class of drugs has only shown neutral effects on heart failure and further studies are necessary in order to assess their role in this disease. SGLT-2 inhibitors have shown strong benefits in heart failure hospitalizations and renal outcomes, mainly through limiting glomerular filtration rate deterioration, regardless of the presence of diabetes. Nonetheless, their effect on the prevention of major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events and cardiovascular mortality seems to be limited to patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. Evidence on the cardiovascular and renal benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT-2 inhibitors have significantly modified management plans and treatment choices for patients with type 2 diabetes. There is now a focus on a multifactorial approach that goes beyond the glucose-lowering effect of these drugs, which are the preferred choice in routine clinical practice. According to the current evidence, a patient-focused approach that includes both individualized glycemic control and cardiorenal prevention using GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT-2 inhibitors with proven cardiovascular and renal benefits is believed to be the best strategy for achieving the treatment goals of patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite the strong cardiovascular and renal benefits of these drugs, further research is required in order to clarify questions that remain unanswered.

Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Elderly Patients with Frailty and/or Sarcopenia.

The life expectancy of the population is increasing worldwide due to improvements in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. This favors a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the elderly. Sarcopenia and frailty are also frequently present in aging. These three entities share common mechanisms such as insulin resistance, chronic inflammation, and mitochondrial dysfunction. The coexistence of these situations worsens the prognosis of elderly patients. In this paper, we review the main measures for the prevention and management of sarcopenia and/or frailty in elderly patients with T2DM.

Efficacy and Safety of Semaglutide for the Management of Obese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Heart Failure in Real-World Clinical Practice.

Background: The impact of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on patients with heart failure has not been fully described. Our main objective was to evaluate the safety and clinical and glycemic efficacy of once-weekly semaglutide in obese patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure. Methods: In this observational, retrospective, real-world study, we enrolled outpatients with type 2 diabetes, obesity, and heart failure who started semaglutide and were followed-up on at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: A total of 136 patients were included. From baseline to 12 months, there was a significant improvement on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (59.0 ± 24.1 vs 79.9 ± 28.4 points, p<0.01), a reduction in the proportion of patients with New York Heart Association functional class III (40.4% to 16.2%, p<0.01), and a reduction in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (969.5 ± 653.5 vs 577.4 ± 322.1 pg/mL, p<0.01). Emergency department visits due to heart failure, hospitalizations due to heart failure, and all-cause hospitalizations also declined. Additionally, significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin (-1.4%) and body weight (-12.7 kilograms) were observed as well as a de-intensification of antidiabetic therapy. Moreover, semaglutide was safe and well-tolerated. Conclusion: In obese patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure, the use of once-weekly semaglutide was safe and clinically efficacious, improving health and functional status. Nevertheless, more strong evidence on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in heart failure is required.

Clinical benefits of empagliflozin in very old patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in older patients with heart failure. This work analyzed the clinical efficacy and safety of empagliflozin continuation in very old patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure. METHODS: We conducted a real-world observational study between September 2015 and June 2021. Patients ≥80 years were grouped by antihyperglycemic regimen: (1) continuation of preadmission empagliflozin combined with basal insulin regimen and (2) conventional basal-bolus insulin regimen. A propensity score matching analysis matched patients in both groups in a 1:1 manner. The primary outcome was differences in clinical efficacy measured by the visual analogue scale dyspnea score, NT-proBNP levels, diuretic response, and cumulative urine output. Safety endpoints such as adverse events, worsening heart failure, discontinuation of empagliflozin, length of hospital stay, and in-hospital deaths were also analyzed. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 79 patients were included in each group. At discharge, the N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were lower in the empagliflozin continuation group than in the insulin group (1699 ± 522 vs. 2303 ± 598 pg/ml, p = 0.021). Both the diuretic response and cumulative urine output were greater in patients treated with empagliflozin than in patients with basal-bolus insulin during the hospitalization (at discharge: -0.14 ± -0.06 vs. -0.24 ± -0.10, p = 0.044; and 16,100 ± 1510 vs. 13,900 ± 1220 ml, p = 0.037, respectively). No differences were observed in safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In very old patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for acute heart failure, continuing preadmission empagliflozin reduced NT-proBNP levels and increased diuretic response and urine output compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen. The empagliflozin regimen also showed a good safety profile.

Obesity, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Risk Burden in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Current Approaches and Knowledge Gaps-A Rapid Scoping Review.

Obesity, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular risk are real challenges in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) clinical practice and research. The evidence of the burden of these health problems in SLE patients is determined by the methods used to assess them. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to map current approaches in assessing obesity, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular risk burden in SLE patients and to identify existing knowledge gaps in this field. This rapid scoping review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and identified 274 articles, of which 73 were included. Most studies were conducted at European institutions and patients were recruited from specialist hospital clinics, the majority of whom were women. The burden of obesity and diabetes mellitus for SLE patients was assessed mainly in terms of prevalence, impact on disease activity, and cardiometabolic risk. The burden of cardiovascular risk was assessed using multiple approaches, mainly imaging and laboratory methods, and risk factor-based scores, although there is great heterogeneity and uncertainty between the methods used. This review highlights the importance of improving and standardizing the approach to obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk in SLE patients through a holistic assessment that includes lifestyle, clinical, biological, and social aspects.

A healthy lifestyle is associated with lower arterial stiffness in a metabolically healthy elderly population with overweight or obesity.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Arterial stiffness is linked with the development of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular diseases. In clinical practice, measurement of carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV) has become a widely used study for the assessment of cardiovascular risk in elderly population. Our aim was to evaluate whether maintaining a healthy life, based on Mediterranean Diet (MedDiet) and regular practice of physical activity, are associated with arterial stiffness in an elderly, metabolically healthy with overweight or obesity (MHOe) population. INDIVIDUALS AND METHODS: A transversal, analytical-descriptive study in MHOe population (aged ≥65 years) with a BMI at least 27 kg/ m 2 who had one or less of the following cardiometabolic disorders: fasting plasma glucose at least 100 mg/dl, blood pressure at least 135/85 mmHg (or the use of blood pressure-lowering agents), low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (≤ 40 mg/dl for men, ≤50 mg/dl for women) or triglycerides at least 150 mg/dl (or the use of lipid-lowering therapies) was conducted. Blood pressure, height, weight, BMI, waist to hip ratio (WHR), practice of physical activity, MedDiet adherence and food intake along with cf-PWV were analysed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-eight MHOe individuals (age: 72.2 ±â€Š5.0 years, BMI: 31.6 ±â€Š3.8 kg/m 2 ) were recruited. One hundred and nine of them were younger than 75 years of age (young-old, age: 69.3 ±â€Š2.8 years and BMI: 32.0 ±â€Š3.9 kg/m 2 ) and 49 of them aged 75 years or older (old-old, age: 78.1 ±â€Š2.9 years and BMI: 30.7 ±â€Š3.6 kg/m 2 ). All population showed a strong adherence to the Med Diet due major consumption of homemade meal, olive oil and lean meats. In addition, they presented an important practice of all intensities of physical activity. Young-old individuals had a cf-PWV of 9.7 ±â€Š2.2 m/s and old-old individuals had a cf-PWV of 11.1 ±â€Š4.4 m/s. In all populations, a negative correlation between cf-PWV and BMI ( r  = -0.17, P  = 0.04) and a positive correlation with WHR in men ( r  = 0.18, P  = 0.03) was found. WHR shows a significantly positive correlation with the cf-PWV values in old-old women participants ( r  = 0.41, P  = 0.008). On the other side, only vigorous physical activity showed a negative correlation with cf-PWV in all population and in young-old individuals ( r  = -0.20; P  = 0.02 and r  = -0.22; P  = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Healthy lifestyle habits based on MedDiet adherence and regular practice of physical activity are associated with lower arterial stiffness in a metabolically healthy population with overweight or obesity older than 65 years compared with data from other elderly populations previously reported in the literature.

C-Reactive Protein and Serum Albumin Ratio: A Feasible Prognostic Marker in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.

(1) Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin are inflammatory markers. We analyzed the prognostic capacity of serum albumin (SA) and CRP for an outcome comprising mortality, length of stay, ICU admission, and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the Spanish national SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Two multivariate logistic models were adjusted for SA, CRP, and their combination. Training and testing samples were used to validate the models. (3) Results: The outcome was present in 41.1% of the 3471 participants, who had lower SA (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.6] g/dL vs. 3.8 [0.5] g/dL; p < 0.001) and higher CRP (108.9 [96.5] mg/L vs. 70.6 [70.3] mg/L; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate model, both were associated with poorer evolution: SA, OR 0.674 (95% CI, 0.551−0.826; p < 0.001); CRP, OR 1.002 (95% CI, 1.001−1.004; p = 0.003). The CRP/SA model had a similar predictive capacity (honest AUC, 0.8135 [0.7865−0.8405]), with a continuously increasing risk and cutoff value of 25 showing the highest predictive capacity (OR, 1.470; 95% CI, 1.188−1.819; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SA and CRP are good independent predictors of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the CRP/SA ratio value, 25 is the cutoff for poor clinical course.

Ethnicity and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain: Results from the Multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: This work aims to analyze clinical outcomes according to ethnic groups in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain. (2) Methods: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study analyzed hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2021. Clinical outcomes were assessed according to ethnicity (Latin Americans, Sub-Saharan Africans, Asians, North Africans, Europeans). The outcomes were in-hospital mortality (IHM), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Associations between ethnic groups and clinical outcomes adjusted for patient characteristics and baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index values and wave were evaluated using logistic regression. (3) Results: Of 23,953 patients (median age 69.5 years, 42.9% women), 7.0% were Latin American, 1.2% were North African, 0.5% were Asian, 0.5% were Sub-Saharan African, and 89.7% were European. Ethnic minority patients were significantly younger than European patients (median (IQR) age 49.1 (40.5−58.9) to 57.1 (44.1−67.1) vs. 71.5 (59.5−81.4) years, p < 0.001). The unadjusted IHM was higher in European (21.6%) versus North African (11.4%), Asian (10.9%), Latin American (7.1%), and Sub-Saharan African (3.2%) patients. After further adjustment, the IHM was lower in Sub-Saharan African (OR 0.28 (0.10−0.79), p = 0.017) versus European patients, while ICU admission rates were higher in Latin American and North African versus European patients (OR (95%CI) 1.37 (1.17−1.60), p < 0.001) and (OR (95%CI) 1.74 (1.26−2.41), p < 0.001). Moreover, Latin American patients were 39% more likely than European patients to use IMV (OR (95%CI) 1.43 (1.21−1.71), p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The adjusted IHM was similar in all groups except for Sub-Saharan Africans, who had lower IHM. Latin American patients were admitted to the ICU and required IMV more often.

Remdesivir in Very Old Patients (≥80 Years) Hospitalized with COVID-19: Real World Data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: Large cohort studies of patients with COVID-19 treated with remdesivir have reported improved clinical outcomes, but data on older patients are scarce. Objective: This work aims to assess the potential benefit of remdesivir in unvaccinated very old patients hospitalized with COVID-19; (2) Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of patients ≥ 80 years hospitalized in Spain between 15 July and 31 December 2020 (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry). Differences in 30-day all-cause mortality were adjusted using a multivariable regression analysis. (3) Results: Of the 4331 patients admitted, 1312 (30.3%) were ≥80 years. Very old patients treated with remdesivir (n: 140, 10.7%) had a lower mortality rate than those not treated with remdesivir (OR (95% CI): 0.45 (0.29−0.69)). After multivariable adjustment by age, sex, and variables associated with lower mortality (place of COVID-19 acquisition; degree of dependence; comorbidities; dementia; duration of symptoms; admission qSOFA; chest X-ray; D-dimer; and treatment with corticosteroids, tocilizumab, beta-lactams, macrolides, and high-flow nasal canula oxygen), the use of remdesivir remained associated with a lower 30-day all-cause mortality rate (adjusted OR (95% CI): 0.40 (0.22−0.61) (p < 0.001)). (4) Conclusions: Remdesivir may reduce mortality in very old patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

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.

Statin Therapy in Very Old Patients: Lights and Shadows.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) are the leading cause of death worldwide. High levels of total cholesterol-and of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in particular-are one of the main risk factors associated with ASCVD. Statins are first-line treatment for hypercholesterolemia and have been proven to reduce major vascular events in adults with and without underlying ASCVD. Findings in the literature show that statins reduce coronary and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality in middle-aged people, but their benefits in older adults are not as well-established, especially in primary prevention. Furthermore, many particularities must be considered regarding their use in old subjects, such as age-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, comorbidities, polypharmacy, and frailty, which decrease the safety and efficacy of statins in this population. Myopathy and a possible higher risk of falling along with cognitive decline are classic concerns for physicians when considering statin use in the very old. Additionally, some studies suggest that the relative risk for coronary events and cardiovascular mortality associated with high levels of cholesterol decreases after age 70, making the role of statins unclear. On the other hand, ASCVD are one of the most important causes of disability in old subjects, so cardiovascular prevention is of particular interest in this population in order to preserve functional status. This review aims to gather the current available evidence on the efficacy and safety of statin use in very old patients in both primary and secondary prevention.

Differences between Clinical Protocols for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Andalusia, Spain.

Our objective was to compare clinical protocols for the treatment of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among different hospitals in Andalusia, Spain. We reviewed the current COVID-19 protocols of the 15 largest hospitals in Andalusia. Antiviral treatment, empirical antibacterial agents, adjunctive therapies, anticoagulant treatment, supportive care, hospital organization, and discharge recommendations were analyzed. All protocols included were the latest updates as of July 2020. Hydroxychloroquine in monotherapy was the most frequent antiviral drug recommended for mild respiratory illness with clinical risk factors (33.3%). Combined hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin or lopinavir/ritonavir was found in 40% of protocols. The recommended treatment for patients with mild and moderate pneumonias was different antiviral combinations including hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (93.3%) or hydroxychloroquine plus lopinavir/ritonavir (79.9%). Different combinations of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir (46.7%) and triple therapy with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir (40%) were the most recommended treatments for patients with severe pneumonia. There were five corticosteroid regimens, which used dexamethasone, methylprednisolone, or prednisone, with different doses and treatment durations. Anakinra was included in seven protocols with six different regimens. All protocols included prophylactic heparin and therapeutic doses for thromboembolism. Higher prophylactic doses of heparin for high-risk patients and therapeutic doses for patients in critical condition were included in 53.3% and 33.3% of protocols, respectively. This study showed that COVID-19 protocols varied widely in several aspects (antiviral treatment, corticosteroids, anakinra, and anticoagulation for high risk of thrombosis or critical situation). Rigorous randomized clinical trials on the proposed treatments are needed to provide consistent evidence.

Predicting Clinical Outcome with Phenotypic Clusters in COVID-19 Pneumonia: An Analysis of 12,066 Hospitalized Patients from the Spanish Registry SEMI-COVID-19.

(1) Background: Different clinical presentations in COVID-19 are described to date, from mild to severe cases. This study aims to identify different clinical phenotypes in COVID-19 pneumonia using cluster analysis and to assess the prognostic impact among identified clusters in such patients. (2) Methods: Cluster analysis including 11 phenotypic variables was performed in a large cohort of 12,066 COVID-19 patients, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI)-COVID-19 Registry. (3) Results: Of the total of 12,066 patients included in the study, most were males (7052, 58.5%) and Caucasian (10,635, 89.5%), with a mean age at diagnosis of 67 years (standard deviation (SD) 16). The main pre-admission comorbidities were arterial hypertension (6030, 50%), hyperlipidemia (4741, 39.4%) and diabetes mellitus (2309, 19.2%). The average number of days from COVID-19 symptom onset to hospital admission was 6.7 (SD 7). The triad of fever, cough, and dyspnea was present almost uniformly in all 4 clinical phenotypes identified by clustering. Cluster C1 (8737 patients, 72.4%) was the largest, and comprised patients with the triad alone. Cluster C2 (1196 patients, 9.9%) also presented with ageusia and anosmia; cluster C3 (880 patients, 7.3%) also had arthromyalgia, headache, and sore throat; and cluster C4 (1253 patients, 10.4%) also manifested with diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Compared to each other, cluster C1 presented the highest in-hospital mortality (24.1% vs. 4.3% vs. 14.7% vs. 18.6%; p < 0.001). The multivariate study identified age, gender (male), body mass index (BMI), arterial hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic cardiopathy, chronic heart failure, chronic hepatopathy, Charlson's index, heart rate and respiratory rate upon admission >20 bpm, lower PaO2/FiO2 at admission, higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and the phenotypic cluster as independent factors for in-hospital death. (4) Conclusions: The present study identified 4 phenotypic clusters in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, which predicted the in-hospital prognosis of clinical outcomes.