Sports-related sudden cardiac arrest in young adults.

AIMS: Data on sports-related sudden cardiac arrest (SrSCA) among young adults in the general population are scarce. We aimed to determine the overall SrSCA incidence, characteristics, and outcomes in young adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective cohort study of all cases of SrSCA between 2012 and 2019 in Germany and Paris area, France, involving subjects aged 18-35 years. Detection of SrSCA was achieved via multiple sources, including emergency medical services (EMS) reporting and web-based screening of media releases. Cases and aetiologies were centrally adjudicated. Overall, a total of 147 SrSCA (mean age 28.1 ± 4.8 years, 95.2% males) occurred, with an overall burden of 4.77 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.85-6.68] cases per million-year, including 12 (8.2%) cases in young competitive athletes. While bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was initiated in 114 (82.6%), automated external defibrillator (AED) use by bystanders occurred only in a minority (7.5%). Public AED use prior to EMS arrival (odds ratio 6.25, 95% CI 1.48-43.20, P = 0.02) was the strongest independent predictor of survival at hospital discharge (38.1%). Among cases that benefited from both immediate bystander CPR and AED use, survival rate was 90.9%. Coronary artery disease was the most frequent aetiology (25.8%), mainly through acute coronary syndrome (86.9%). CONCLUSION: Sports-related sudden cardiac arrest in the young occurs mainly in recreational male sports participants. Public AED use remains disappointingly low, although survival may reach 90% among those who benefit from both bystander CPR and early defibrillation. Coronary artery disease is the most prevalent cause of SrSCA in young adults.

Impact of peri-procedural management of direct oral anticoagulants on pocket haematoma after cardiac electronic device implantation: the StimAOD multicentre prospective study.

AIMS: The study aims to investigate the impact of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) management on the incidence of pocket haematoma in patients undergoing pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive patients receiving DOAC and undergoing cardiac electronic device implantation were included in a large multicentre prospective observational study (NCT03879473). The primary endpoint was clinically relevant haematoma within 30 days after implantation. Overall, 789 patients were enrolled [median age 80 (IQR 72-85) years old, 36.4% women, median CHA2DS2-VASc score 4 (IQR 0-8)], of which 632 (80.1%) received a pacemaker implantation. Antiplatelet therapy was combined with DOAC in 146 patients (18.5%). Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were interrupted 52 (IQR 37-62) h before the procedure and resumed 31 (IQR 21-47) h later. Ninety-six percent of the patients had at least 12 h DOAC interruption before the procedure, and 78% had at least 12 h DOAC interruption after the procedure. Overall, anticoagulation was interrupted for 72 (IQR 48-96) h. Pre- or post-procedural heparin bridging was used in 8.2% and 3.9%, respectively. Timing of DOAC interruption of resumption was not associated with clinically relevant haematoma. Clinically relevant haematoma occurred in 26 patients (3.3%), and thromboembolic events occurred in 5 patients (0.6%). CONCLUSION: In this large real-life registry where most patients had DOAC interruption, clinically relevant haematoma was rare. Despite DOAC interruption and high CHA2DS2-VASc score, thromboembolic events occurred seldomly, highlighting that bleeding exceeds thromboembolic risk in this peri-procedural period. Future research is needed to identify risk factors for clinically relevant haematoma and meaningfully guide clinicians in optimizing DOAC management.

COVID-19 severity in kidney transplant recipients is similar to nontransplant patients with similar comorbidities.

Higher rates of severe COVID-19 have been reported in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) compared to nontransplant patients. We aimed to determine if poorer outcomes were specifically related to chronic immunosuppression or underlying comorbidities. We used a 1:1 propensity score-matching method to compare survival and severe disease-free survival (defined as death and/or need for intensive care unit [ICU]) incidence in hospitalized KTRs and nontransplant control patients between February 26 and May 22, 2020. Patients were matched for risk factors of severe COVID-19: age, sex, body mass index, diabetes mellitus, preexisting cardiopathy, chronic lung disease, and basal renal function. We included 100 KTRs (median age [interquartile range (IQR)]) 64.7 years (55.3-73.1) in three French transplant centers. After a median follow-up of 13 days (7-30), transfer to ICU was required for 34 patients (34%) and death occurred in 26 patients (26%). Overall, 43 patients (43%) developed a severe disease during a median follow-up of 8.5 days (2-14). Propensity score matching to a large French cohort of 2017 patients hospitalized in 24 centers, revealed that survival was similar between KTRs and matched nontransplant patients with respective 30-day survival of 62.9% and 71% (p = .38) and severe disease-free 30-day survival of 50.6% and 47.5% (p = .91). These findings suggest that severity of COVID-19 in KTRs is related to their associated comorbidities and not to chronic immunosuppression.

Pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients: a French multicentre cohort study.

AIMS: While pulmonary embolism (PE) appears to be a major issue in COVID-19, data remain sparse. We aimed to describe the risk factors and baseline characteristics of patients with PE in a cohort of COVID-19 patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a retrospective multicentre observational study, we included consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Patients without computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA)-proven PE diagnosis and those who were directly admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) were excluded. Among 1240 patients (58.1% men, mean age 64 ± 17 years), 103 (8.3%) patients had PE confirmed by CTPA. The ICU transfer and mechanical ventilation were significantly higher in the PE group (for both P < 0.001). In an univariable analysis, traditional venous thrombo-embolic risk factors were not associated with PE (P > 0.05), while patients under therapeutic dose anticoagulation before hospitalization or prophylactic dose anticoagulation introduced during hospitalization had lower PE occurrence [odds ratio (OR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-0.91, P = 0.04; and OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.18, P < 0.001, respectively]. In a multivariable analysis, the following variables, also statistically significant in univariable analysis, were associated with PE: male gender (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.003-1.069, P = 0.04), anticoagulation with a prophylactic dose (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.85, P < 0.001) or a therapeutic dose (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.92, P < 0.001), C-reactive protein (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04, P = 0.001), and time from symptom onset to hospitalization (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.006-1.038, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: PE risk factors in the COVID-19 context do not include traditional thrombo-embolic risk factors but rather independent clinical and biological findings at admission, including a major contribution to inflammation.

[Physical activity to reduce cardiovascular risk -Why deprive yourself ?] / L'activité sportive pour réduire le risque cardiovasculaire ­ Pourquoi s'en priverait-on ?

Sports-related sudden death is an uncommon event, affecting mainly middle-aged men who practice leisure sports, and is related to unknown coronary artery disease. In athletes, cardiac causes are also predominant, with a greater proportion of structural and electrical heart disease. If first-aid resuscitation measures are initiated, survival easily exceeds 50%, and this is an excellent educational illustration of how to improve the prognosis of non-sport-related cardiac arrest. Prevention of a sport-related cardiovascular event remains difficult, and relies on clinical examination, questioning (including family history) and resting ECG in participants >35 years old. The non-contraindication visit is also an opportunity to pass on to the patient the rules of good sports "hygiene" and life-saving gestures in the event of sudden death during sport in one of the partners (and the importance of regularly educating oneself in life-saving gestures...).

Molecular genetic screening after non-ischaemic sudden cardiac arrest and no overt cardiomyopathy in real life: A major tool for the aetiological diagnostic work-up.

BACKGROUND: With the development of advanced sequencing techniques, genetic testing has emerged as a valuable tool for the work-up of non-ischaemic sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of genetic testing in patients with unexplained SCA, according to clinical phenotype. METHODS: All patients who underwent molecular genetic testing for non-ischaemic SCA with no left ventricular cardiomyopathy between 2012 and 2021 in two French university hospitals were included. RESULTS: Of 66 patients (mean age 36.7±11.9years, 54.5% men), 21 (31.8%; 95% confidence interval 22.4-45.3%) carried a genetic variant: eight (12.1%) had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant and 13 (19.7%) had a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). Among 37 patients (56.1%) with no phenotypic clues, genetic testing identified a P/LP variant in five (13.5%), mainly in RYR2 (n=3) and SCN5A (n=2), and a VUS in nine (24.3%). None of the nine patients with phenotypic evidence of channelopathies had P/LP variants, but two had VUS in RYR2 and NKX2.5. Among the 20 patients with suspected arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, three P/LP variants (15.0%) and two VUS (10.0%) were found in DSC2, PKP2, SCN5A and DSG2, TRPM4, respectively. Genetic testing was performed sooner after cardiac arrest (P<0.001) and results were obtained more rapidly (P=0.02) after versus before 2016. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the utility of molecular genetic testing with a genetic variant of interest identified in one-third of patients with unexplained SCA. Genetic testing was beneficial even in patients without phenotypic clues, with one-fourth of patients carrying a P/LP variant that could have direct implications.

Sudden cardiac arrest in patients with cancer in the general population: insights from the Paris-SDEC registry.

BACKGROUND: Data on the management of patients with cancer presenting with sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) are scarce. We aimed to assess the characteristics and outcomes of SCA according to cancer history. METHODS: Prospective, population-based registry including every out-of-hospital SCA in adults in Paris and its suburbs, between 2011 and 2019, with a specific focus on patients with cancer. RESULTS: Out of 4069 patients who had SCA admitted alive in hospital, 207 (5.1%) had current or past medical history of cancer. Patients with cancer were older (69.2 vs 59.3 years old, p<0.001), more often women (37.2% vs 28.0%, p=0.006) with more frequent underlying cardiovascular disease (41.1% vs 32.5%, p=0.01). SCA happened more often with a non-shockable rhythm (62.6% vs 43.1%, p<0.001) with no significant difference regarding witness presence and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed. Cardiac causes were less frequent among patients with cancer (mostly acute coronary syndromes, 25.5% vs 46.8%, p<0.001) and had more respiratory causes (pulmonary embolism and hypoxaemia in 34.2% vs 10.8%, p<0.001). Still, no difference regarding in-hospital survival was found after SCA in patients with cancer versus other patients (26.2% vs 29.8%, respectively, p=0.27). Public location, CPR by witness and shockable rhythm were independent predictors of in-hospital survival after SCA in the cancer group. CONCLUSIONS: One in 20 SCA occurs in patients with a history of cancer, yet with fewer cardiac causes than in patients who are cancer-free. Still, in-hospital outcomes remain similar even in patients with known cancer. Cancer history should therefore not compromise the initiation of resuscitation in the context of SCA.

Prognostic impact of high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy under-prescription after acute myocardial infarction in women.

AIMS: Women are less likely to receive lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We analysed whether this under-prescription currently persists and has an impact on long-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The FAST-MI programme consists of nationwide registries including all patients admitted for AMI ≤ 48 h from onset over a 1 month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. This analysis focused on high-intensity LLT (atorvastatin ≥ 40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) in women and men. Women accounted for 28% (N = 3547) of the 12 659 patients. At discharge, high-intensity LLT was significantly less prescribed in women [54 vs. 68% in men, P < 0.001, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.78(95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.87)], a trend that did not improve over time: 2005, 25 vs. 35% (P = 0.14); 2010, 66 vs. 79% (P < 0.001); 2015, 67 vs. 79.5% (P = 0.001). In contrast, female sex was not associated with a lack of other recommended treatments at discharge: beta-blockers [adjusted OR 0.98(95% CI 0.88-1.10), P = 0.78], or renin-angiotensin blockers [adjusted OR 0.94(95% CI 0.85-1.03), P = 0.18]. High-intensity LLT at discharge was significantly associated with improved 5 year survival and infarct- and stroke-free survival in women [adjusted hazard ratios (HR) 0.74(95% CI 0.64-0.86), P < 0.001 and adjusted HR: 0.81(95% CI: 0.74-0.89); P < 0.001, respectively]. Similar results were found using a propensity score-matched analysis [HR for 5 year survival in women with high-intensity LLT: 0.82(95% CI 0.70-0.98), P = 0.03]. CONCLUSION: Women suffer from a bias regarding the prescription of high-intensity LLT after AMI, which did not attenuate between 2005 and 2015, with potential consequences on both survival and risk of cardiovascular events.

Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) is under-prescribed in women after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Whether this difference persists over time and influences long-term outcomes is unclear. Women still suffer from insufficient prescription of high-intensity LLT at discharge after an AMI, even in the most recent years of the study, with a 5 year survival significantly reduced in women who did not receive high-dose LLT Propensity score matched analysis showed similar results on survival and cardiovascular events.

Association of Use and Dose of Lipid-Lowering Therapy Post Acute Myocardial Infarction With 5-Year Survival in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Older people are underrepresented in randomized trials. The association between lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and its intensity after acute myocardial infarction and long-term mortality in this population deserves to be assessed. METHODS: The FAST-MI (French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) program consists of nationwide French surveys including all patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction ≤48 hours from onset over a 1- to 2-month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. Numerous data were collected and a centralized 10-year follow-up was organized. The present analysis focused on the association between prescription of LLT (atorvastatin ≥40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) and 5-year mortality in patients aged ≥80 years discharged alive. Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching were used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Among the 2258 patients aged ≥80 years (mean age, 85±4 years; 51% women; 39% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 58% with percutaneous coronary intervention), 415 were discharged without LLT (18%), 866 with conventional doses (38%), and 977 with high-dose LLT (43%). Five-year survival was 36%, 47.5%, and 58%, respectively. Compared with patients without LLT, high-dose LLT was significantly associated with lower 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.92]), whereas conventional-intensity LLT was not (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.80-1.09]). In propensity score-matched cohorts (n=278 receiving high-intensity LLT and n=278 receiving no statins), 5-year survival was 52% with high-intensity LLT at discharge and 42% without statins (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: In these observational cohorts, high-intensity LLT at discharge after acute myocardial infarction was associated with reduced all-cause mortality at 5 years in an older adult population. These results suggest that high-intensity LLT should not be denied to patients on the basis of old age. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00673036, NCT01237418, and NCT02566200.

Incidence of Cardiac Arrest During Sports Among Women in the European Union.

BACKGROUND: Women represent a growing proportion of sports participants. Still, few original data regarding sudden cardiac arrest during sports (Sr-SCA) in women are available. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to assess the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of women presenting with Sr-SCA. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 3 population-based European registries (ESCAPE-NET 2020 Horizon Program) that prospectively and exhaustively collect every case of SCA: SDEC (Paris-Sudden Death Expertise Center), ARREST (AmsteRdam REsuscitation Studies), and SRCR (Swedish Register for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation). Sr-SCA was defined as SCA during or ≤1 hour after cessation of sports activity. RESULTS: Of 34,826 SCA between 2006 and 2017, 760 Sr-SCA (2.2%) were identified, including 54 in women. The average annual incidence of Sr-SCA in women in the 3 registries ranged from 0.10 per million (95% CI: 0.01-0.71 per million) to 0.38 per million (95% CI: 0.14-1.04 per million). Overall, the average annual incidence rate of Sr-SCA in women was 0.19 per million (95% CI: 0.14-0.24 per million), >10-fold lower compared with men (2.63 per million [95% CI: 2.45-2.83 per million]; P < 0.0001). When extrapolating to the total European population and accounting for age and sex, this yields 98 cases per year (95% CI: 72-123 cases per year) in women and 1,350 cases per year (95% CI: 1,256-1,451 cases per year) in men. Subject characteristics and circumstances of occurrence were similar in women vs men. Bystander response, time to defibrillation, and survival rate at hospital admission (58.8% vs 58.5%; P = 0.99) and 30 days did not differ significantly between women and men. CONCLUSIONS: These findings emphasize the dramatically lower risk of Sr-SCA in women compared with men, despite similar subject characteristics. This should be considered in designing preparticipation screening strategies in the future.

Very long-term outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in young men and women: Insights from the FAST-MI program.

AIMS: Conflicting data exists about long-term outcomes in young women and men experiencing acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: The FAST-MI program consists of three nationwide French surveys carried out 5years apart from 2005 to 2015, including consecutive patients with AMI over a 1-month period with up to 10-year follow-up. The present analysis focused on adults≤50 yo according to their gender. RESULTS: Women accounted for 17.5% (335) of the 1912 patients under 50 yo and had a similar age as men (43.9±5.1 vs. 43.9±5.5years, P=0.92). They received less percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) than men (85.9% vs. 91.3%, P=0.005), even in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (83.6% vs. 93.5%, P<0.001). Recommended secondary prevention medications were less frequently prescribed at discharge in women (40.6% vs. 52.8%, P<0.001), a trend that persisted in 2015 (59.1% vs. 72.8% in 2015, P<0.001). Still, ten-year survival was similar in men (90.5%) and women (92.3%) (crude HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.55-1.35], P=0.52, adjusted HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.38-1.07], P=0.09); similar results were found for ten-year survival among hospital survivors (91.2% in men vs. 93.7% in women, adjusted HR: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.45-1.66], P=0.66). Of the 1684 patients alive at hospital discharge with morbidity follow-up≥6months available, death, AMI or stroke at 8years occurred in 12.9% men and 11.2% in women (adjusted HR: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.60-1.33], P=0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Young women with AMI undergo less cardiac interventions and are less often prescribed secondary prevention treatment than men, even when significant coronary artery disease is present, but keep a similar long-term prognosis after AMI. Optimal management of these young patients, regardless of gender, is necessary to ensure best outcomes after this major cardiovascular event.

Platelet activation and coronavirus disease 2019 mortality: Insights from coagulopathy, antiplatelet therapy and inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with an inflammatory cytokine burst and a prothrombotic coagulopathy. Platelets may contribute to microthrombosis, and constitute a therapeutic target in COVID-19 therapy. AIM: To assess if platelet activation influences mortality in COVID-19. METHODS: We explored two cohorts of patients with COVID-19. Cohort A included 208 ambulatory and hospitalized patients with varying clinical severities and non-COVID patients as controls, in whom plasma concentrations of the soluble platelet activation biomarkers CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and P-selectin (sP-sel) were quantified within the first 48hours following hospitalization. Cohort B was a multicentre cohort of 2878 patients initially admitted to a medical ward. In both cohorts, the primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: In cohort A, median circulating concentrations of sCD40L and sP-sel were only increased in the 89 critical patients compared with non-COVID controls: sP-sel 40,059 (interquartile range 26,876-54,678)pg/mL; sCD40L 1914 (interquartile range 1410-2367)pg/mL (P<0.001 for both). A strong association existed between sP-sel concentration and in-hospital mortality (Kaplan-Meier log-rank P=0.004). However, in a Cox model considering biomarkers of immunothrombosis, sP-sel was no longer associated with mortality, in contrast to coagulopathy evaluated with D-dimer concentration (hazard ratio 4.86, 95% confidence interval 1.64-12.50). Moreover, in cohort B, a Cox model adjusted for co-morbidities suggested that prehospitalization antiplatelet agents had no significant impact on in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.80-1.37; P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed an association between excessive biomarkers of platelet activation and in-hospital mortality, our findings rather suggest that coagulopathy is more central in driving disease progression, which may explain why prehospitalization antiplatelet drugs were not a protective factor against mortality in our multicentre cohort.

D-dimer, BNP/NT-pro-BNP, and creatinine are reliable decision-making biomarkers in life-sustaining therapies withholding and withdrawing during COVID-19 outbreak.

Background: The decision for withholding and withdrawing of life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) in COVID-19 patients is currently based on a collegial and mainly clinical assessment. In the context of a global pandemic and overwhelmed health system, the question of LST decision support for COVID-19 patients using prognostic biomarkers arises. Methods: In a multicenter study in 24 French hospitals, 2878 COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical departments from 26 February to 20 April 2020 were included. In a propensity-matched population, we compared the clinical, biological, and management characteristics and survival of patients with and without LST decision using Student's t-test, the chi-square test, and the Cox model, respectively. Results: An LST was decided for 591 COVID-19 patients (20.5%). These 591 patients with LST decision were secondarily matched (1:1) based on age, sex, body mass index, and cancer history with 591 COVID-19 patients with no LST decision. The patients with LST decision had significantly more cardiovascular diseases, such as high blood pressure (72.9 vs. 66.7%, p = 0.02), stroke (19.3 vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001), renal failure (30.4 vs. 17.4%, p < 0.001), and heart disease (22.5 vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001). Upon admission, LST patients were more severely attested by a qSOFA score ≥2 (66.5 vs. 58.8%, p = 0.03). Biologically, LST patients had significantly higher values of D-dimer, markers of heart failure (BNP and NT-pro-BNP), and renal damage (creatinine) (p < 0.001). Their evolutions were more often unfavorable (in-hospital mortality) than patients with no LST decision (41.5 vs. 10.3%, p < 0.001). By combining the three biomarkers (D-dimer, BNP and/or NT-proBNP, and creatinine), the proportion of LST increased significantly with the number of abnormally high biomarkers (24, 41.3, 48.3, and 60%, respectively, for none, one, two, and three high values of biomarkers, trend p < 0.01). Conclusion: The concomitant increase in D-dimer, BNP/NT-proBNP, and creatinine during the admission of a COVID-19 patient could represent a reliable and helpful tool for LST decision. Circulating biomarker might potentially provide additional information for LST decision in COVID-19.

Evolution of Incidence, Management, and Outcomes Over Time in Sports-Related Sudden Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Major efforts have been made to reduce the burden of sports-related sudden cardiac arrest (SrSCA). The extent to which the incidence, management, and outcomes changed over time has not been investigated. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess temporal trends in SrSCA incidence, management, and survival. METHODS: Using data from the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research, we evaluated the evolution of incidence, prehospital management, and survival at hospital discharge of SrSCA among subjects aged 18 to 75 years, over 6 successive 2-year periods between 2005 and 2018. RESULTS: Among the 377 SrSCA, 20 occurred in young competitive athletes (5.3%), whereas 94.7% occurred in middle-aged recreational sports participants. Comparing the last 2-year to the first 2-year period, SrSCA incidence remained stable (6.24 vs 7.00 per million inhabitants/y; P = 0.51), with no significant differences in patients' mean age (46.6 ± 13.8 years vs 51.0 ± 16.4 years; P = 0.42), sex (men 94.7% vs 95.2%; P = 0.99), and history of heart disease (12.5% vs 15.9%; P = 0.85). However, frequency of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and public automated external defibrillator use increased significantly (34.9% vs 94.7%; P < 0.001 and 1.6% vs 28.8%; P = 0.006, respectively). Survival to hospital discharge improved steadily, reaching 66.7% in the last study period compared with 23.8% in the first (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of SrSCA remained relatively stable over time, suggesting a need for improvement in screening strategies. However, major improvements in on-field resuscitation led to a 3-fold increase in survival, underlining the value of public education in basic life support that should serve as an example for SCA in general.

Incidence, Characteristics, and Outcomes of Ventricular Fibrillation Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction in Women Admitted Alive in the Hospital.

Background Little data are available in women presenting with ventricular fibrillation (VF) in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We assessed frequency, predictors of VF, and outcomes, with a special focus on women compared with men. Methods and Results Data were analyzed from the FAST-MI (French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) program, which prospectively included 14 406 patients admitted to French cardiac intensive care units ≤48 hours from AMI onset between 1995 and 2015 (mean age, 66±14 years; 72% men; mean left ventricular ejection fraction, 52±12%; 59% with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction). A total of 359 patients developed VF during AMI, including 81 women (2.0% of 4091 women) and 278 men (2.7% of 10 315 men, P=0.02). ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 2.29 [95% CI, 1.75-2.99]; P<0.001) was independently associated with the onset of VF during AMI. In contrast, female sex (OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.56-0.95]; P=0.02), hypertension (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.60-0.94]; P=0.01), and prior myocardial infarction (OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.50-0.96]; P=0.03) were protective factors. Women were less likely to have cardiac intervention than men (percutaneous coronary intervention during hospitalization 48.1% versus 66.9%, respectively; P=0.04) with a higher 1-year mortality in women compared with men (50.6% versus 37.4%, respectively; P=0.03), including increased in-hospital mortality (42.0% versus 32.7%, respectively; P=0.12). After adjustment, female sex was no longer associated with a worse 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.75-1.61]; P=0.63). Conclusions Women have lower risk of developing VF during AMI compared with men. However, they are less likely to receive cardiac interventions than men, possibly contributing to missed opportunities of improved outcomes.

Prognostic value of right ventricular dilatation in patients with COVID-19: a multicentre study.

AIMS: Although cardiac involvement has prognostic significance in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is associated with severe forms, few studies have explored the prognostic role of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We investigated the link between TTE parameters and prognosis in COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to 24 French hospitals were retrospectively included. Comprehensive data, including clinical and biological parameters, were recorded at admission. Focused TTE was performed during hospitalization, according to clinical indication. Patients were followed for a primary composite outcome of death or transfer to intensive care unit (ICU) during hospitalization. Among 2878 patients, 445 (15%) underwent TTE. Most of these had cardiovascular risk factors, a history of cardiovascular disease, and were on cardiovascular treatments. Dilatation and dysfunction were observed in, respectively, 12% (48/412) and 23% (102/442) of patients for the left ventricle, and in 12% (47/407) and 16% (65/402) for the right ventricle (RV). Primary composite outcome occurred in 44% (n = 196) of patients [9% (n = 42) for death without ICU transfer and 35% (n = 154) for admission to ICU]. RV dilatation was the only TTE parameter associated with the primary outcome. After adjustment, male sex [hazard ratio (HR) 1.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 - 2.25; P = 0.02], higher body mass index (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02 - 1.18; P = 0.01), anticoagulation (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.33 - 0.86; P = 0.01), and RV dilatation (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.05 - 2.64; P = 0.03) remained independently associated with the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Echocardiographic evaluation of RV dilatation could be useful for assessing risk of severe COVID-19 developing in hospitalized patients.

Machine learning-based scoring system to predict in-hospital outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The evolution of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still hard to predict, even after several months of dealing with the pandemic. AIMS: To develop and validate a score to predict outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: All consecutive adults hospitalized for COVID-19 from February to April 2020 were included in a nationwide observational study. Primary composite outcome was transfer to an intensive care unit from an emergency department or conventional ward, or in-hospital death. A score that estimates the risk of experiencing the primary outcome was constructed from a derivation cohort using stacked LASSO (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator), and was tested in a validation cohort. RESULTS: Among 2873 patients analysed (57.9% men; 66.6±17.0 years), the primary outcome occurred in 838 (29.2%) patients: 551 (19.2%) were transferred to an intensive care unit; and 287 (10.0%) died in-hospital without transfer to an intensive care unit. Using stacked LASSO, we identified 11 variables independently associated with the primary outcome in multivariable analysis in the derivation cohort (n=2313), including demographics (sex), triage vitals (body temperature, dyspnoea, respiratory rate, fraction of inspired oxygen, blood oxygen saturation) and biological variables (pH, platelets, C-reactive protein, aspartate aminotransferase, estimated glomerular filtration rate). The Critical COVID-19 France (CCF) risk score was then developed, and displayed accurate calibration and discrimination in the derivation cohort, with C-statistics of 0.78 (95% confidence interval 0.75-0.80). The CCF risk score performed significantly better (i.e. higher C-statistics) than the usual critical care risk scores. CONCLUSIONS: The CCF risk score was built using data collected routinely at hospital admission to predict outcomes in patients with COVID-19. This score holds promise to improve early triage of patients and allocation of healthcare resources.

Intermediate- vs. Standard-Dose Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients With COVID-19 Admitted in Medical Ward: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

Background: Microthrombosis and large-vessel thrombosis are the main triggers of COVID-19 worsening. The optimal anticoagulant regimen in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards remains unknown. Objectives: To evaluate the effects of intermediate-dose vs. standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (AC) among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in medical wards. Methods and results: We used a large French multicentric retrospective study enrolling 2,878 COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards. After exclusion of patients who had an AC treatment before hospitalization, we generated a propensity-score-matched cohort of patients who were treated with intermediate-dose or standard-dose prophylactic AC between February 26 and April 20, 2020 (intermediate-dose, n = 261; standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, n = 763). The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality; this occurred in 23 of 261 (8.8%) patients in the intermediate-dose group and 74 of 783 (9.4%) patients in the standard-dose prophylactic AC group (p = 0.85); while time to death was also the same in both the treatment groups (11.5 and 11.6 days, respectively, p = 0.17). We did not observe any difference regarding venous and arterial thrombotic events between the intermediate dose and standard dose, respectively (venous thrombotic events: 2.3 vs. 2.4%, p=0.99; arterial thrombotic events: 2.7 vs. 1.2%, p = 0.25). The 30-day Kaplan-Meier curves for in-hospital mortality demonstrate no statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality (HR: 0.99 (0.63-1.60); p = 0.99). Moreover, we found that no particular subgroup was associated with a significant reduction in in-hospital mortality. Conclusion: Among COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards, intermediate-dose prophylactic AC compared with standard-dose prophylactic AC did not result in a significant difference in in-hospital mortality.