Cardiometabolic and psychocognitive features of the post-COVID period in patients with atrial fibrillation.

The number of people with long-term consequences of COVID-19 is increasing worldwide. The long-term prognosis for patients remains poorly understood. Objective. To study cardiometabolic and psychocognitive features in comorbid elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), de-pending on the presence of post-COVID syndrome (PCS). Material and methods. The observational analytical cohort study included 223 patients with AF and comorbidity (coronary artery disease, hypertension, obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus) aged 60-74, who were divided into two groups: group 1 included 123 patients without COVID-19 and group 2 included 110 patients with a history of COVID-19 and the presence of PCS. The study evaluated laboratory and instrumental tests, and a general clinical study assessing psychocognitive disorders using the SPMSQ and HADS questionnaires was conducted. Results and discussion. In COVID-19 survivors, compared with patients of group 1, there were more pronounced atherogenic changes in total cholesterol (TC) (p=0.003), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p<0.001), and triglycerides (p=0.011). Lower dia-stolic blood pressure was found in COVID-19 survivors (p<0.001). In addition, patients in group 2 had higher median pulse pressure (p<0.001) and heart rate (p<0.001). In group 2 patients, a larger ascending aorta diameter was observed (p<0.001). The anx-iety-depressive syndrome was more common in COVID-19 survivors with comorbidities, and a statistically significant difference was found in clinical anxiety (24%, p=0.041) and subclinical depression (21%, p=0.015). When assessing cognitive function, mod-erate cognitive impairment was detected in 22% (p=0.005) of patients with PCS and severe cognitive impairment in 2% (p=0.007). Conclusion. In comorbid elderly patients with the post-COVID syndrome, a high prevalence of psychocognitive disorders and adverse cardiometabolic changes were observed, supporting the need for long-term monitoring of the general clinical condition and psychocognitive status of COVID-19 survivors.Copyright © 2023, Media Sphera Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

Cardiometabolic and psychocognitive features of the post-COVID period in patients with atrial fibrillation

The number of people with long-term consequences of COVID-19 is increasing worldwide. The long-term prognosis for patients remains poorly understood. Objective. To study cardiometabolic and psychocognitive features in comorbid elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), de-pending on the presence of post-COVID syndrome (PCS). Material and methods. The observational analytical cohort study included 223 patients with AF and comorbidity (coronary artery disease, hypertension, obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus) aged 60-74, who were divided into two groups: group 1 included 123 patients without COVID-19 and group 2 included 110 patients with a history of COVID-19 and the presence of PCS. The study evaluated laboratory and instrumental tests, and a general clinical study assessing psychocognitive disorders using the SPMSQ and HADS questionnaires was conducted. Results and discussion. In COVID-19 survivors, compared with patients of group 1, there were more pronounced atherogenic changes in total cholesterol (TC) (p=0.003), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p<0.001), and triglycerides (p=0.011). Lower dia-stolic blood pressure was found in COVID-19 survivors (p<0.001). In addition, patients in group 2 had higher median pulse pressure (p<0.001) and heart rate (p<0.001). In group 2 patients, a larger ascending aorta diameter was observed (p<0.001). The anx-iety-depressive syndrome was more common in COVID-19 survivors with comorbidities, and a statistically significant difference was found in clinical anxiety (24%, p=0.041) and subclinical depression (21%, p=0.015). When assessing cognitive function, mod-erate cognitive impairment was detected in 22% (p=0.005) of patients with PCS and severe cognitive impairment in 2% (p=0.007). Conclusion. In comorbid elderly patients with the post-COVID syndrome, a high prevalence of psychocognitive disorders and adverse cardiometabolic changes were observed, supporting the need for long-term monitoring of the general clinical condition and psychocognitive status of COVID-19 survivors.Copyright © 2023, Media Sphera Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of pre-induction dynamic arterial elastance as an adjustable predictor of post-induction hypotension: A prospective observational study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) has been suggested as a functional measure of arterial load. We aimed to evaluate whether pre-induction Eadyn can predict post-induction hypotension. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing general anesthesia with invasive and non-invasive arterial pressure monitoring systems. MEASUREMENTS: We collected invasive and non-invasive Eadyns (n = 38 in each), respectively. In both invasive and non-invasive Eadyns, pre-induction Eadyns were obtained during one-minute tidal and deep breathing in each patient before anesthetic induction. Post-induction hypotension was defined as a decrease of >30% in mean blood pressure from the baseline value or any absolute mean blood pressure value of <65 mmHg for 10 min after anesthetic induction. The predictabilities of Eadyns for the development of post-induction hypotension were tested using receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. MAIN RESULTS: Invasive Eadyn during deep breathing showed significant predictability with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78 (95% Confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.90, P = 0.001). But non-invasive Eadyn during tidal breathing (AUC = 0.66, 95% CI, 0.49-0.81, P = 0.096) and deep breathing (AUC = 0.53, 95% CI, 0.36-0.70, P = 0.75), and invasive Eadyn during tidal breathing (AUC = 0.66, 95% CI, 0.41-0.74, P = 0.095) failed to predict post-induction hypotension. CONCLUSION: In our study, invasive pre-induction Eadyn during deep breathing -could predict post-induction hypotension. Despite its invasiveness, future studies will be needed to evaluate the usefulness of Eadyn as a predictor of post-induction hypotension because it is an adjustable parameter.

Tidal volume challenge to predict preload responsiveness in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome under prone position.

BACKGROUND: Prone position is frequently used in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), especially during the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Our study investigated the ability of pulse pressure variation (PPV) and its changes during a tidal volume challenge (TVC) to assess preload responsiveness in ARDS patients under prone position. METHODS: This was a prospective study conducted in a 25-bed intensive care unit at a university hospital. We included patients with ARDS under prone position, ventilated with 6 mL/kg tidal volume and monitored by a transpulmonary thermodilution device. We measured PPV and its changes during a TVC (ΔPPV TVC6-8) after increasing the tidal volume from 6 to 8 mL/kg for one minute. Changes in cardiac index (CI) during a Trendelenburg maneuver (ΔCITREND) and during end-expiratory occlusion (EEO) at 8 mL/kg tidal volume (ΔCI EEO8) were recorded. Preload responsiveness was defined by both ΔCITREND ≥ 8% and ΔCI EEO8 ≥ 5%. Preload unresponsiveness was defined by both ΔCITREND < 8% and ΔCI EEO8 < 5%. RESULTS: Eighty-four sets of measurements were analyzed in 58 patients. Before prone positioning, the ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen was 104 ± 27 mmHg. At the inclusion time, patients were under prone position for 11 (2-14) hours. Norepinephrine was administered in 83% of cases with a dose of 0.25 (0.15-0.42) µg/kg/min. The positive end-expiratory pressure was 14 (11-16) cmH2O. The driving pressure was 12 (10-17) cmH2O, and the respiratory system compliance was 32 (22-40) mL/cmH2O. Preload responsiveness was detected in 42 cases. An absolute change in PPV ≥ 3.5% during a TVC assessed preload responsiveness with an area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve of 0.94 ± 0.03 (sensitivity: 98%, specificity: 86%) better than that of baseline PPV (0.85 ± 0.05; p = 0.047). In the 56 cases where baseline PPV was inconclusive (≥ 4% and < 11%), ΔPPV TVC6-8 ≥ 3.5% still enabled to reliably assess preload responsiveness (AUROC: 0.91 ± 0.05, sensitivity: 97%, specificity: 81%; p < 0.01 vs. baseline PPV). CONCLUSION: In patients with ARDS under low tidal volume ventilation during prone position, the changes in PPV during a TVC can reliably assess preload responsiveness without the need for cardiac output measurements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04457739). Registered 30 June 2020 -Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04457739.

BLOOD PRESSURE CONTROL RATES PREVIOUS AND DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN BRAZIL

Objective: to compare the previous blood pressure control rates with those assessed during the COVID-19 pandemic Design and method: two cross-sectional studies (march to November 2019 and march to November 2020). Participated patients from health centers of five Brazilian regions that used the TeleMRPA platform to report tests on people diagnosed with and under control of arterial hypertension, aged between 18 and 100 years, included. Data from patients with duplicate or inaccurate information excluded. Blood pressure control measures < or = 140/90 mmHg considered for casual measurements and/or < or = 130/80 for residential measurements. Results: 38.698 patients evaluated, 54.7% in 2019 and 43.9% from northeastern Brazil. There was an increase in patients not using antihypertensive drugs from 52.5% in 2019 to 61.3% in 2020 (p < 0.001) and BMI from 28.1 (± 4.5) to 28.3 (± 4.5) p = 0.010. We did not identify differences in the comparison of SBP (office and MRPA) between the two periods evaluated. There was an increase in DBP both in the office from 83.8 (±11.8) to 84.5 (±11.9), p < 0.001 as that obtained by the MRPA from 79.25 (±9.58) to 79.57 (±9.68), p = 0.001. The variability of DBP reduced from 5.9 (±2.49) to 5.9 (±2.43), p < 0.001, and the mean Pulse Pressure was 50.7 (±14.4) in 2019 to 50.3 (±14.3) in 2020, p = 0.009. There was no change in the control rates considering the office measure which was from 68.9% to 68.6% and the MRPA from 52.4% to 51.4% from 2019 to 2020. Conclusions: blood pressure control remained stable during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to the previous year. Assessing and monitoring blood pressure control through telemonitoring using home blood pressure monitoring is a simple, easy-to-access, and effective method.

EFFECT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON THE NYCHTHEMERAL BLOOD PRESSURE PROFILE

Objective: The world is currently facing the fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of this pandemic on ambulatory blood pressure measurements and to compare the blood pressure profile between COVID-19 positive and negative patients. Design and method: We performed a unicentric, retrospective study on the register of ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM) of the ERASME Hospital from 2010 to 2021. ABPMs performed during the pandemic period (January 2020 to October 2021) were compared with those from 5 previous control periods. In order to improve the comparison of the different periods, we considered variations (delta) of each period from the previous 3 months. For all patients whose ABPM was performed during the COVID-19 period, we looked for COVID test results preceding the ABPM. These patients were classified into 2 groups COVID positive, if at least one PCR or serological test was positive, and COVID negative if not. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 23.0. Results: After exclusion of incomplete and poor-quality ABPMs, 18766 were retained, of which 1796 (9.57%) were for the COVID-19 period. The control periods represented 14.77% to 18.81% of the MAPAs in the study. We observed that diurnal, nocturnal and 24-hour diastolic blood pressures (BP) were higher in the COVID-19 period than in the previous 5 periods ranging from January 2010 to October 2019. Pulse pressure was lower in the COVID-19 period compared to the previous periods. Of the 1796 patients in the COVID-19 period, pre-ABPM COVID- 19 status were obtained from 368 patients, 322 negatives and 46 positives. In COVID-19 positive patients, daytime systolic BP was higher than in COVID-19 negative patients (88,41 ± 11,74 vs 84,63 ± 12,24;p = 0.047). Also, the pulse pressure of COVID-19 positive patients was lower (44,46 ± 7,72 vs 47,57 ± 8,84). No significant differences were observed between the two groups for the other parameters. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in increased daytime and nighttime diastolic blood pressures. Also, this study suggests an increase in diurnal diastolic blood pressure after COVID-19 infection.

Impact of Arterial Stiffness on All-Cause Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in Spain.

Older age and cardiovascular comorbidities are well-known risk factors for all-cause mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hypertension and age are the 2 principal determinants of arterial stiffness (AS). This study aimed to estimate AS in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization and analyze its association with all-cause in-hospital mortality. This observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort study analyzed 12 170 patients admitted to 150 Spanish centers included in the SEMI-COVID-19 Network. We compared AS, defined as pulse pressure ≥60 mm Hg, and clinical characteristics between survivors and nonsurvivors. Mean age was 67.5 (±16.1) years and 42.5% were women. Overall, 2606 (21.4%) subjects died. Admission systolic blood pressure (BP) <120 and ≥140 mm Hg was a predictor of higher all-cause mortality (23.5% and 22.8%, respectively, P<0.001), compared with systolic BP between 120 and 140 mm Hg (18.6%). The 4379 patients with AS (36.0%) were older and had higher systolic and lower diastolic BP. Multivariate analysis showed that AS and systolic BP <120 mm Hg significantly and independently predicted all-cause in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj]: 1.27, P=0.0001; ORadj: 1.48, P=0.0001, respectively) after adjusting for sex (males, ORadj: 1.6, P=0.0001), age tertiles (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 2.0 and 4.7, P=0.0001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (second and third tertiles, ORadj: 4.8 and 8.6, P=0.0001), heart failure, and previous and in-hospital antihypertensive treatment. Our data show that AS and admission systolic BP <120 mm Hg had independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization.