Association of Body Mass Index and Age With Morbidity and Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Results From the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry.

BACKGROUND: Obesity may contribute to adverse outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, studies of large, broadly generalizable patient populations are lacking, and the effect of body mass index (BMI) on COVID-19 outcomes- particularly in younger adults-remains uncertain. METHODS: We analyzed data from patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at 88 US hospitals enrolled in the American Heart Association's COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry with data collection through July 22, 2020. BMI was stratified by World Health Organization obesity class, with normal weight prespecified as the reference group. RESULTS: Obesity, and, in particular, class III obesity, was overrepresented in the registry in comparison with the US population, with the largest differences among adults ≤50 years. Among 7606 patients, in-hospital death or mechanical ventilation occurred in 2109 (27.7%), in-hospital death in 1302 (17.1%), and mechanical ventilation in 1602 (21.1%). After multivariable adjustment, classes I to III obesity were associated with higher risks of in-hospital death or mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.09-1.51], 1.57 [1.29-1.91], 1.80 [1.47-2.20], respectively), and class III obesity was associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death (hazard ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.00-1.58]). Overweight and class I to III obese individuals were at higher risk for mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.09-1.51], 1.54 [1.29-1.84], 1.88 [1.52-2.32], and 2.08 [1.68-2.58], respectively). Significant BMI by age interactions were seen for all primary end points (P-interaction<0.05 for each), such that the association of BMI with death or mechanical ventilation was strongest in adults ≤50 years, intermediate in adults 51 to 70 years, and weakest in adults >70 years. Severe obesity (BMI ≥40 kg/m2) was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death only in those ≤50 years (hazard ratio, 1.36 [1.01-1.84]). In adjusted analyses, higher BMI was associated with dialysis initiation and with venous thromboembolism but not with major adverse cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: Obese patients are more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19, and are at higher risk of in-hospital death or mechanical ventilation, in particular, if young (age ≤50 years). Obese patients are also at higher risk for venous thromboembolism and dialysis. These observations support clear public health messaging and rigorous adherence to COVID-19 prevention strategies in all obese individuals regardless of age.

Sex and Race Differences in Lifetime Risk of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction and Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Lifetime risk of heart failure has been estimated to range from 20% to 46% in diverse sex and race groups. However, lifetime risk estimates for the 2 HF phenotypes, HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), are not known. METHODS: Participant-level data from 2 large prospective cohort studies, the CHS (Cardiovascular Health Study) and MESA (Multiethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), were pooled, excluding individuals with prevalent HF at baseline. Remaining lifetime risk estimates for HFpEF (EF ≥45%) and HFrEF (EF <45%) were determined at different index ages with the use of a modified Kaplan-Meier method with mortality and the other HF subtype as competing risks. RESULTS: We included 12 417 participants >45 years of age (22.2% blacks, 44.8% men) who were followed up for median duration of 11.6 years with 2178 overall incident HF events with 561 HFrEF events and 726 HFpEF events. At the index age of 45 years, the lifetime risk for any HF through 90 years of age was higher in men than women (27.4% versus 23.8%). Among HF subtypes, the lifetime risk for HFrEF was higher in men than women (10.6% versus 5.8%). In contrast, the lifetime risk for HFpEF was similar in men and women. In race-stratified analyses, lifetime risk for overall HF was higher in nonblacks than blacks (25.9% versus 22.4%). Among HF subtypes, the lifetime risk for HFpEF was higher in nonblacks than blacks (11.2% versus 7.7%), whereas that for HFrEF was similar across the 2 groups. Among participants with antecedent myocardial infarction before HF diagnosis, the remaining lifetime risks for HFpEF and HFrEF were up to 2.5-fold and 4-fold higher, respectively, compared with those without antecedent myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Lifetime risks for HFpEF and HFrEF vary by sex, race, and history of antecedent myocardial infarction. These insights into the distribution of HF risk and its subtypes could inform the development of targeted strategies to improve population-level HF prevention and control.

The Current Literature on Bioabsorbable Stents: a Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to explore the evolution of the coronary stent, from the advent of bare-metal stents, to the newest adopted technology of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) used in bioresorbable stents. To date, there have been conflicting data regarding the safety and efficacy of BVS stents, especially when compared to current-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). This review will cover the data that exist regarding current BVS stents, as well as the active clinical trials for future iterations of BVS. RECENT FINDINGS: The ABSORB BVS, the most widely circulated stent of its class, was promised to decrease rates of stent thrombosis and target vessel revascularization. Several randomized control trials, however, found the opposite to be true, with the ABSORB BVS demonstrating higher rates of thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and even target lesion myocardial infarctions when compared to current-generation DES. These data caused the product to be pulled from all markets, leaving the field with uncertainty as to the role of BVS in coronary interventions. Coronary stents have evolved significantly from 1977, when they were first introduced. The original bare-metal stent was later fitted with a drug-eluting polymer, to prevent restenosis and thrombosis over time. Subsequent iterations of the stent attempted to further mitigate that risk by replacing the durable polymer to one that is bioresorbable. The final step in this progression was to create a stent that was fully bioresorbable, which Abbott did with the creation of their ABSORB BVS stent. The product, however, was found to perform poorly when compared to current-generation drug-eluting stents, with several trials showing high rates of stent thrombosis (ST), late stent thrombosis (LST), target-lesion myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Observational studies of BVS stents have proposed several mechanisms for their thrombogenicity, including higher stent-strut profiles leading to turbulent flow, low radial strength leading to strut disruption, and a higher propensity for neoatherosclerosis. Given the failure of the first-generation BVS stent, but the lingering desire for fully bioresorbable scaffolds, various manufacturers have proposed their solutions with new stents. Until data from their clinical trials emerge, it remains unclear whether fully bioresorbable stents will play any role in coronary interventions.

The Evolving Role of Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Exercise in Prevention and Management of Heart Failure.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper highlights the dynamic relationship between cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and heart failure (HF). As heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) surpasses heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in prevalence, our void in understanding how to treat this syndrome becomes less justifiable. As such, significant attention has been given to the role that obesity and physical inactivity play, as both risk factors for heart failure, and therapeutic targets for its treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Previous findings have shown that low CRF, obesity, and physical inactivity are all risk factors for HF. More recently, it has been discovered that these factors are even more significant when applied to HFpEF, even after accounting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors. As such, new investigations have attempted to discover whether improvements in CRF could be utilized as a tool for prevention of HF. In addition, small studies have shown that interventions to improve CRF in patients with HF could improve both quality of life and fitness. The role of CRF, PA, and obesity in the development of HF is now well established; however, our ability to attenuate that risk is yet to be determined. Observational data have signaled a correlation between improvements in PA, CRF and lower risk of HF however, large randomized controlled trials are still required to truly determine whether exercise training could be used in the prevention and treatment of HF, particularly HFpEF.

Factors associated with early, late, and very late stent thrombosis among patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary stent placement: analysis from the ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 trial.

Background: Stent thrombosis (ST) is an uncommon but serious complication of stent implantation. This study aimed to explore factors associated with early, late, and very late ST to help guide risk assessment and clinical decision-making on ST. Methods: The analysis included patients who received stent placement for the index acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Cumulative incidence of ST was assessed at 30 days (early ST), 31-360 days (late ST), 361-720 days (very late ST), and up to 720 days. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess associations between ST and various factors, including patient characteristics [i.e., age, sex, ACS presentation, history of hypertension, smoking, diabetes, prior myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, prior ischemic stroke, and cancer], laboratory tests [i.e., positive cardiac biomarker, hemoglobin, platelet count, white blood cell (WBC) count], and treatment [i.e., drug-eluting stent (DES) vs. bare-metal stent (BMS) and anticoagulant with rivaroxaban vs. placebo]. Results: Among the 8,741 stented patients, 155 ST events (2.25%) occurred by Day 720. The cumulative incidences of early, late, and very late ST were 0.80%, 0.81%, and 0.77%, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, age ≥ 75 [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.13 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.26-3.60)], a history of prior MI [HR = 1.81 (95% CI: 1.22-2.68)], low hemoglobin level [HR = 2.34 (95% CI: 1.59-3.44)], and high WBC count [HR = 1.58 (95% CI: 1.02-2.46)] were associated with a greater risk of overall ST, whereas DES [HR = 0.56 (95% CI: 0.38-0.83)] and rivaroxaban therapy [HR = 0.63 (95% CI: 0.44-0.88)] were associated with a lower risk of overall ST up to 720 days. Low hemoglobin level and high WBC count were associated with early ST (low hemoglobin: HR = 2.35 [95% CI: 1.34-4.12]; high WBC count: HR = 2.11 [95% CI: 1.17-3.81]). Low hemoglobin level and prior MI were associated with a greater risk of late ST (low hemoglobin: HR = 2.32 [95% CI: 1.26-4.27]; prior MI: HR = 2.98 [95% CI: 1.67-5.31]), whereas DES was associated with a lower risk of late ST [HR = 0.33 (95% CI: 0.16-0.67)]. Age ≥75 years was associated with very late ST. Conclusion: The study identified positive and negative associations with early, late, and very late ST. These variables may be useful in constructing risk assessment models for ST. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT00809965.

Association of Kidney Disease With Outcomes in COVID-19: Results From the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry.

Background Emerging evidence links acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with COVID-19 with higher mortality and respiratory morbidity, but the relationship of AKI with cardiovascular disease outcomes has not been reported in this population. We sought to evaluate associations between chronic kidney disease (CKD), AKI, and mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results In a large multicenter registry including 8574 patients with COVID-19 from 88 US hospitals, data were collected on baseline characteristics and serial laboratory data during index hospitalization. Primary exposure variables were CKD (categorized as no CKD, CKD, and end-stage kidney disease) and AKI (classified into no AKI or stages 1, 2, or 3 using a modification of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guideline definition). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The key secondary outcome was major adverse cardiac events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, new-onset nonfatal heart failure, and nonfatal cardiogenic shock. CKD and end-stage kidney disease were not associated with mortality or major adverse cardiac events after multivariate adjustment. In contrast, AKI was significantly associated with mortality (stage 1 hazard ratio [HR], 1.72 [95% CI, 1.46-2.03]; stage 2 HR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.52-2.20]; stage 3 HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.44-1.98]; versus no AKI) and major adverse cardiac events (stage 1 HR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.74-2.71]; stage 2 HR, 2.70 [95% CI, 2.07-3.51]; stage 3 HR, 3.06 [95% CI, 2.52-3.72]; versus no AKI). Conclusions This large study demonstrates a significant association between AKI and all-cause mortality and, for the first time, major adverse cardiovascular events in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Association of COVID-19 Hospitalization Volume and Case Growth at US Hospitals with Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Whether the volume of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations is associated with outcomes has important implications for the organization of hospital care both during this pandemic and future novel and rapidly evolving high-volume conditions. METHODS: We identified COVID-19 hospitalizations at US hospitals in the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry with ≥10 cases between January and August 2020. We evaluated the association of COVID-19 hospitalization volume and weekly case growth indexed to hospital bed capacity, with hospital risk-standardized in-hospital case-fatality rate (rsCFR). RESULTS: There were 85 hospitals with 15,329 COVID-19 hospitalizations, with a median hospital case volume was 118 (interquartile range, 57, 252) and median growth rate of 2 cases per 100 beds per week but varied widely (interquartile range: 0.9 to 4.5). There was no significant association between overall hospital COVID-19 case volume and rsCFR (rho, 0.18, P = .09). However, hospitals with more rapid COVID-19 case-growth had higher rsCFR (rho, 0.22, P = 0.047), increasing across case growth quartiles (P trend = .03). Although there were no differences in medical treatments or intensive care unit therapies (mechanical ventilation, vasopressors), the highest case growth quartile had 4-fold higher odds of above median rsCFR, compared with the lowest quartile (odds ratio, 4.00; 1.15 to 13.8, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: An accelerated case growth trajectory is a marker of hospitals at risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes, identifying sites that may be targets for influx of additional resources or triage strategies. Early identification of such hospital signatures is essential as our health system prepares for future health challenges.

Expansion of TAVR into Low-Risk Patients and Who to Consider for SAVR.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS) over the last decade. The results of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) 3 and Evolut Low Risk trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of TAVR in low-surgical-risk patients and led to the approval of TAVR for use across the risk spectrum. Heart teams around the world will now be faced with evaluating a deluge of younger, healthier patients with severe AS. Prior to the PARTNER 3 and Evolut Low Risk studies, this heterogenous patient population would have undergone surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). It is unlikely that TAVR will completely supplant SAVR for the treatment of severe AS in patients with a low surgical risk, as SAVR has excellent short- and long-term outcomes and years of durability data. In this review, we outline the critical role that SAVR will continue to play in the treatment of severe AS in the post-PARTNER 3/Evolut Low Risk era.

Fibrinolytic Strategy for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Contemporary Review in Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in additional challenges for systems designed to perform expeditious primary percutaneous coronary intervention for patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. There are 2 important considerations: the guideline-recommended time goals were difficult to achieve for many patients in high-income countries even before the pandemic, and there is a steep increase in mortality when primary percutaneous coronary intervention cannot be delivered in a timely fashion. Although the use of fibrinolytic therapy has progressively decreased over the last several decades in high-income countries, in circumstances when delays in timely delivery of primary percutaneous coronary intervention are expected, a modern fibrinolytic-based pharmacoinvasive strategy may need to be considered. The purpose of this review is to systematically discuss the contemporary role of an evidence-based fibrinolytic reperfusion strategy as part of a pharmacoinvasive approach, in the context of the emerging coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.