Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 21
Filter
1.
Int J Clin Pract ; 2022: 7325060, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35685504

ABSTRACT

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Thromboembolism , Administration, Oral , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Prognosis , Registries , Thromboembolism/prevention & control
2.
Am Heart J ; 237: 104-115, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33845032

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. METHODS: HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. RESULTS: We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION: RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Failure/etiology , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Prognosis , Registries , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Spain/epidemiology
3.
Crit Care Med ; 49(6): e624-e633, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33861553

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Registries , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Correlation of Data , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/drug therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Risk , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome
4.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 51(1): e13436, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33080051

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) shows high morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with concomitant cardiovascular diseases. Some of these patients are under oral anticoagulation (OAC) at admission, but to date, there are no data on the clinical profile, prognosis and risk factors of such patients during hospitalization for COVID-19. DESIGN: Subanalysis of the international 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients with prior OAC at hospital admission for COVID-19 were suitable for the study. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: From 1002 patients included, 110 (60.9% male, median age of 81.5 [IQR 75-87] years, median Short-Form Charlson Comorbidity Index [CCI] of 1 [IQR 1-3]) were on OAC at admission, mainly for atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism. After propensity score matching, 67.9% of these patients died during hospitalization, which translated into a significantly higher mortality risk compared to patients without prior OAC (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.16). After multivariate Cox regression analysis, respiratory insufficiency during hospitalization (HR 6.02, 95% CI 2.18-16.62), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) during hospitalization (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.34-3.91) and the Short-Form CCI (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.49) were the main risk factors for mortality in patients on prior OAC. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to patients without prior OAC, COVID-19 patients on OAC therapy at hospital admission showed lower survival and higher mortality risk. In these patients on OAC therapy, the prevalence of several comorbidities is high. Respiratory insufficiency and SIRS during hospitalization, as well as higher comorbidity, pointed out those anticoagulated patients with increased mortality risk.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Atrial Fibrillation/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Hospital Mortality , Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Female , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Heparin/therapeutic use , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Multivariate Analysis , Prognosis , Propensity Score , Proportional Hazards Models , Renal Insufficiency/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/epidemiology , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology
5.
Infection ; 49(4): 677-684, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33646505

ABSTRACT

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions (OGD) are a frequent symptom of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has been proposed that the neuroinvasive potential of the novel SARS-CoV-2 could be due to olfactory bulb invasion, conversely studies suggest it could be a good prognostic factor. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prognosis value of OGD in COVID-19. These symptoms were recorded on admission from a cohort study of 5868 patients with confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 infection included in the multicenter international HOPE Registry (NCT04334291). There was statistical relation in multivariate analysis for OGD in gender, more frequent in female 12.41% vs 8.67% in male, related to age, more frequent under 65 years, presence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoke, renal insufficiency, lung, heart, cancer and neurological disease. We did not find statistical differences in pregnant (p = 0.505), patient suffering cognitive (p = 0.484), liver (p = 0.1) or immune disease (p = 0.32). There was inverse relation (protective) between OGD and prone positioning (0.005) and death (< 0.0001), but no with ICU (0.165) or mechanical ventilation (0.292). On univariable logistic regression, OGD was found to be inversely related to death in COVID-19 patients. The odds ratio was 0.26 (0.15-0.44) (p < 0.001) and Z was - 5.05. The presence of anosmia is fundamental in the diagnosis of SARS.CoV-2 infection, but also could be important in classifying patients and in therapeutic decisions. Even more knowing that it is an early symptom of the disease. Knowing that other situations as being Afro-American or Latino-American, hypertension, renal insufficiency, or increase of C-reactive protein (CRP) imply a worse prognosis we can make a clinical score to estimate the vital prognosis of the patient. The exact pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 that causes olfactory and gustative disorders remains unknown but seems related to the prognosis. This point is fundamental, insomuch as could be a plausible way to find a treatment.


Subject(s)
Anosmia/etiology , COVID-19/complications , SARS-CoV-2 , Taste Disorders/etiology , Aged , Anosmia/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Prognosis , Registries , Risk Factors , Taste Disorders/epidemiology
6.
Age Ageing ; 50(2): 326-334, 2021 02 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33201181

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. METHODS: post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65-74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71-83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission <92% (OR 5.85), severe lymphopenia (<500/mm3) (OR 3.36) and qSOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score) >1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation <92%, severe lymphopenia and qSOFA scale >1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Geriatric Assessment/methods , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , International Cooperation , Male , Mortality , Multimorbidity , Prognosis , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
7.
Emerg Med J ; 38(5): 359-365, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33727235

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged worldwide healthcare systems and limited intensive care facilities, leading to physicians considering the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for managing SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure (ARF). METHODS: We conducted an interim analysis of the international, multicentre HOPE COVID-19 registry including patients admitted for a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection until 18 April 2020. Those treated with NIV were considered. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or need for intubation. The components of the composite endpoint were the secondary outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted predictors of the primary endpoint within those initially treated with NIV were investigated. RESULTS: 1933 patients who were included in the registry during the study period had data on oxygen support type. Among them, 390 patients (20%) were treated with NIV. Compared with those receiving other non-invasive oxygen strategy, patients receiving NIV showed significantly worse clinical and laboratory signs of ARF at presentation. Of the 390 patients treated with NIV, 173 patients (44.4%) met the composite endpoint. In-hospital death was the main determinant (147, 37.7%), while 62 patients (15.9%) needed invasive ventilation. Those requiring invasive ventilation had the lowest survival rate (41.9%). After adjustment, age (adjusted OR (adj(OR)) for 5-year increase: 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.63, p<0.001), hypertension (adj(OR) 2.95, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.61, p=0.03), room air O2 saturation <92% at presentation (adj(OR) 3.05, 95% CI 1.28 to 7.28, p=0.01), lymphocytopenia (adj(OR) 3.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.85, p=0.03) and in-hospital use of antibiotic therapy (adj(OR) 4.91, 95% CI 1.69 to 14.26, p=0.003) were independently associated with the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION: NIV was used in a significant proportion of patients within our cohort, and more than half of these patients survived without the need for intubation. NIV may represent a viable strategy particularly in case of overcrowded and limited intensive care resources, but prompt identification of failure is mandatory to avoid harm. Further studies are required to better clarify our hypothesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Noninvasive Ventilation/mortality , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Registries , Respiration, Artificial/mortality , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Eur J Intern Med ; 124: 108-114, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38472045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Long-term consequences of COVID-19 are still partly known. AIM OF THE STUDY: To derive a clinical score for risk prediction of long-term major cardiac adverse events (MACE) and all cause death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. METHODS: 2573 consecutive patients were enrolled in a multicenter, international registry (HOPE-2) from January 2020 to April 2021 and identified as the derivation cohort. Five hundred and twenty-six patients from the Cardio-Covid-Italy registry were considered as external validation cohort. A long-term prognostic risk score for MACE and all cause death was derived from a multivariable regression model. RESULTS: Out of 2573 patients enrolled in the HOPE-2 registry, 1481 (58 %) were male, with mean age of 60±16 years. At long-term follow-up, the overall rate of patients affected by MACE and/or all cause death was 7.8 %. After multivariable regression analysis, independent predictors of MACE and all cause death were identified. The HOPE-2 prognostic score was therefore calculated by giving: 1-4 points for age class (<65 years, 65-74, 75-84, ≥85), 3 points for history of cardiovascular disease, 1 point for hypertension, 3 points for increased troponin serum levels at admission and 2 points for acute renal failure during hospitalization. Score accuracy at ROC curve analysis was 0.79 (0.74 at external validation). Stratification into 3 risk groups (<3, 3-6, >6 points) classified patients into low, intermediate and high risk. The observed MACE and all-cause death rates were 1.9 %, 9.4 % and 26.3 % for low- intermediate and high-risk patients, respectively (Log-rank test p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The HOPE-2 prognostic score may be useful for long-term risk stratification in patients with previous COVID-19 hospitalization. High-risk patients may require a strict follow-up.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases , Hospitalization , Registries , Humans , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/epidemiology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/methods , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Prognosis , Aged, 80 and over , SARS-CoV-2 , Risk Factors , Cause of Death , Italy/epidemiology , Follow-Up Studies
9.
J Clin Med ; 13(9)2024 Apr 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38731127

ABSTRACT

Background: Acute cardiac injury (ACI) after COVID-19 has been linked with unfavorable clinical outcomes, but data on the clinical impact of elevated cardiac troponin on discharge during follow-up are scarce. Our objective is to elucidate the clinical outcome of patients with elevated troponin on discharge after surviving a COVID-19 hospitalization. Methods: We conducted an analysis in the prospective registry HOPE-2 (NCT04778020). Only patients discharged alive were selected for analysis, and all-cause death on follow-up was considered as the primary endpoint. As a secondary endpoint, we established any long-term COVID-19 symptoms. HOPE-2 stopped enrolling patients on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, of which 1805 were deceased during the acute phase. Finally, 2382 patients alive on discharge underwent propensity score matching by relevant baseline variables in a 1:3 fashion, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Results: Patients with elevated troponin experienced significantly higher all-cause death during follow-up (log-rank = 27.23, p < 0.001), and had a higher chance of experiencing long-term COVID-19 cardiovascular symptoms. Specifically, fatigue and dyspnea (57.7% and 62.8%, with p-values of 0.009 and <0.001, respectively) are among the most common. Conclusions: After surviving the acute phase, patients with elevated troponin on discharge present increased mortality and long-term COVID-19 symptoms over time, which is clinically relevant in follow-up visits.

10.
J Clin Med ; 12(2)2023 Jan 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36675633

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81-3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.

11.
J Clin Med ; 12(11)2023 Jun 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37298018

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

12.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 14: 1167087, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37260447

ABSTRACT

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a higher rate of severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, data about post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) in patients with DM are limited. Methods: This multicenter, propensity score-matched study compared long-term follow-up data about cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other symptoms in 8,719 patients with DM to those without DM. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) according to age and sex resulted in 1,548 matched pairs. Results: Diabetics and nondiabetics had a mean age of 72.6 ± 12.7 years old. At follow-up, cardiovascular symptoms such as dyspnea and increased resting heart rate occurred less in patients with DM (13.2% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.01) than those without DM (2.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.05), respectively. The incidence of newly diagnosed arterial hypertension was slightly lower in DM patients as compared to non-DM patients (0.5% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.18). Abnormal spirometry was observed more in patients with DM than those without DM (18.8% vs. 13; p = 0.24). Paranoia was diagnosed more frequently in patients with DM than in non-DM patients at follow-up time (4% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.009). The incidence of newly diagnosed renal insufficiency was higher in patients suffering from DM as compared to patients without DM (4.8% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.09). The rate of readmission was comparable in patients with and without DM (19.7% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.61). The reinfection rate with COVID-19 was comparable in both groups (2.9% in diabetics vs. 2.3% in nondiabetics; p = 0.55). Long-term mortality was higher in DM patients than in non-DM patients (33.9% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The mortality rate was higher in patients with DM type II as compared to those without DM. Readmission and reinfection rates with COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. The incidence of cardiovascular symptoms was higher in patients without DM.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Reinfection , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Registries , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology
13.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(13): e024530, 2022 07 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35730631

ABSTRACT

Background COVID-19 is an infectious illness, featured by an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, no standard antithrombotic therapy is currently recommended for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of additional therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. Methods and Results A total of 8168 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. Study population included patients treated with PAC or with PAC and aspirin. A comparison of clinical outcomes between patients treated with PAC versus PAC and aspirin was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score matching. Of 7824 patients with complete data, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with PAC and aspirin versus PAC (15% versus 21%, Log Rank P=0.01). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of patients with COVID-19, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure, and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; [95% CI 0.42-0.92], P=0.018). Conclusions Combination PAC and aspirin was associated with lower mortality risk among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a propensity score matched population compared to PAC alone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Humans , Propensity Score , Registries , Retrospective Studies
14.
Heart ; 108(2): 130-136, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34611045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for COVID-19 is continuously evolving. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin-rich microthrombi in several organs. The aim of the study was therefore to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. METHODS: 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation-COVID-19 Registry). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. Data on APT, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, were obtained for each patient. RESULTS: During hospitalisation, 730 (9%) patients received single APT (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (74±12 years vs 63±17 years, p<0.01), more frequently male (68% vs 57%, p<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs 16%, p<0.01). Patients treated with APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs 19%, p=0.64), need for invasive ventilation (8.7% vs 8.5%, p=0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs 2.5% p=0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs 2.4%, p=0.43), but had shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8±5 days vs 11±7 days, p=0.01); however, when comparing patients with APT versus no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (log-rank p<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.94). On multivariable analysis, in-hospital APT was associated with lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: APT during hospitalisation for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04334291.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19/mortality , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Respiration, Artificial
15.
Eur Cardiol ; 16: e28, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34276813

ABSTRACT

Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease. Several circulating inflammatory markers have been proposed for clinical use due to their ability to predict future cardiovascular events and may be useful for identifying people at high risk who might benefit from specific treatment to reduce this risk. Moreover, the identification of new therapeutic targets will allow the development of drugs that can help reduce the high residual risk of recurrence of cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. The clinical benefits of reducing recurrent major cardiovascular events recently shown by canakinumab and colchicine have renewed the cardiology community's interest in inflammation as an aetiopathogenic mechanism for atherosclerosis. This review explores the use of C-reactive protein, which is the most frequently studied biomarker in this context; the concept of residual risk in primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention; and the current recommendations in international guidelines regarding the role of this inflammatory biomarker in cardiovascular risk stratification.

16.
Med Clin (Barc) ; 156(9): 428-436, 2021 05 07.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33627230

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Hypoalbuminemia is a negative acute phase reactant which has been associated with inflammatory response and poor outcome in infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of hypoalbuminemia on admission as a predictor of mortality and adverse events in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from a cohort of 609 consecutive patients, with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, discharged from hospital (deceased or alive). Demographic characteristics, previous comorbidities, symptoms and laboratory findings on admission were collected. Comorbidities were assessed by Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Hypoalbuminemia on admission (<34g/L) was more frequent in nonsurvivors than survivors (65.6% vs. 38%, p<0.001) and was significantly associated with the development of sepsis, macrophage activation syndrome, acute heart failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute kidney injury, regardless of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Hypoalbuminemia was a predictor of mortality in multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR 1.537, 95% CI 1.050-2.250, p=0.027), independently of Charlson-Age Index, gender, lymphocyte count <800/µL, creatinine, high-sensitivity C- reactive protein >8mg/L, lactate dehydrogenase >250U/L, bilateral infiltration on chest X-ray and q-SOFA ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoalbuminemia was an early predictor of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19, regardless of age, comorbidity and inflammatory markers. It also had significant association with severe adverse events, independently of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Our results suggest that serum albumin determination on admission may help to identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk of developing potential life-threatening conditions and death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hypoalbuminemia , Comorbidity , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Med Clin (Engl Ed) ; 156(9): 428-436, 2021 May 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33969222

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Hypoalbuminemia is a negative acute phase reactant which has been associated with inflammatory response and poor outcome in infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to analyze the value of hypoalbuminemia on admission as a predictor of mortality and adverse events in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from a cohort of 609 consecutive patients, with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, discharged from hospital (deceased or alive). Demographic characteristics, previous comorbidities, symptoms and laboratory findings on admission were collected. Comorbidities were assessed by Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Hypoalbuminemia on admission (<34 g/L) was more frequent in nonsurvivors than survivors (65.6% vs. 38%, p < 0.001) and was significantly associated with the development of sepsis, macrophage activation syndrome, acute heart failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute kidney injury, regardless of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Hypoalbuminemia was a predictor of mortality in multivariable Cox regression analysis (HR 1.537, 95% CI 1.050-2.250, p = 0.027), independently of Charlson-Age Index, gender, lymphocyte count <800/µL, creatinine, high-sensitivity C- reactive protein >8 mg/L, lactate dehydrogenase >250 U/L, bilateral infiltration on chest X-ray and q-SOFA ≥2. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoalbuminemia was an early predictor of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19, regardless of age, comorbidity and inflammatory markers. It also had significant association with severe adverse events, independently of Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Our results suggest that serum albumin determination on admission may help to identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk of developing potential life-threatening conditions and death.


OBJETIVOS: La hipoalbuminemia es un reactante de fase aguda negativo que ha sido asociado a la respuesta inflamatoria y mal resultado en enfermedades infecciosas. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar el valor de la hipoalbuminemia en el momento del ingreso, como factor predictivo de mortalidad y episodios adversos en los pacientes de COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Analizamos los datos retrospectivos de una cohorte de 609 pacientes consecutivos, con diagnóstico confirmado de COVID-19, que abandonaron el hospital (fallecidos o vivos). Se recopilaron las características demográficas, comorbilidades previas, síntomas y hallazgos de laboratorio en el momento del ingreso. Las comorbilidades se asociaron al índice de comorbilidad de Charlson-Age. RESULTADOS: La hipoalbuminemia en el momento del ingreso (< 34 g/l) fue más frecuente en los no supervivientes que en los supervivientes (65,6 vs. 38%; p < 0,001) y estuvo significativamente asociada a desarrollo de sepsis, síndrome de activación macrofágica, insuficiencia cardiaca aguda, síndrome de distrés respiratorio agudo e insuficiencia renal aguda, independientemente del índice de comorbilidad de Charlson-Age. La hipoalbuminemia fue un factor predictivo de la mortalidad en el análisis multivariable de regresión de Cox (HR: 1,537; IC 95%: 1,050-2,250; p = 0,027), independientemente del índice de Charlson-Age, sexo, recuento linfocítico < 800/µl, creatinina, proteína C reactiva de alta sensibilidad > 8 mg/l, lactato deshidrogenasa > 250 U/l, infiltración bilateral en la placa de tórax y q-SOFA ≥ 2. CONCLUSIONES: La hipoalbuminemia fue un factor predictivo temprano de la mortalidad intrahospitalaria en la COVID-19, independientemente de la edad, de la comorbilidad y de los marcadores inflamatorios. También tuvo una asociación significativa con episodios adversos graves, independientemente del índice de comorbilidad de Charlson-Age. Nuestros resultados sugieren que determinar la albúmina sérica en el momento del ingreso podría ayudar a identificar a los pacientes con infección por SARS-CoV-2 con alto riesgo de desarrollar situaciones potencialmente mortales y muerte.

18.
Cardiol J ; 28(2): 202-214, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33346365

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The presence of any underlying heart condition could influence outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The registry HOPE-COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19, NCT04334291) is an international ambispective study, enrolling COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital, dead or alive. RESULTS: HOPE enrolled 2798 patients from 35 centers in 7 countries. Median age was 67 years (IQR: 53.0-78.0), and most were male (59.5%). A relevant heart disease was present in 682 (24%) cases. These were older, more frequently male, with higher overall burden of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity) and other comorbidities such renal failure, lung, cerebrovascular disease and oncologic antecedents (p < 0.01, for all). The heart cohort received more corticoids (28.9% vs. 20.4%, p < 0.001), antibiotics, but less hydroxychloroquine, antivirals or tocilizumab. Considering the epidemiologic profile, a previous heart condition was independently related with shortterm mortality in the Cox multivariate analysis (1.62; 95% CI 1.29-2.03; p < 0.001). Moreover, heart patients needed more respiratory, circulatory support, and presented more in-hospital events, such heart failure, renal failure, respiratory insufficiency, sepsis, systemic infammatory response syndrome and clinically relevant bleedings (all, p < 0.001), and mortality (39.7% vs. 15.5%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: An underlying heart disease is an adverse prognostic factor for patients suffering COVID-19. Its presence could be related with different clinical drug management and would benefit from maintaining treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers during in-hospital stay.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Pandemics , Registries , Aged , Comorbidity , Female , Global Health , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
19.
J Hosp Med ; 16(6): 349-352, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34129486

ABSTRACT

Gender-related differences in COVID-19 clinical presentation, disease progression, and mortality have not been adequately explored. We analyzed the clinical profile, presentation, treatments, and outcomes of patients according to gender in the HOPE-COVID-19 International Registry. Among 2,798 enrolled patients, 1,111 were women (39.7%). Male patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and more comorbidities at baseline. After propensity score matching, 876 men and 876 women were selected. Male patients more often reported fever, whereas female patients more often reported vomiting, diarrhea, and hyposmia/anosmia. Laboratory tests in men presented alterations consistent with a more severe COVID-19 infection (eg, significantly higher C-reactive protein, troponin, transaminases, lymphocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, and ferritin). Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, bilateral pneumonia, respiratory insufficiency, and renal failure were significantly more frequent in men. Men more often required pronation, corticosteroids, and tocilizumab administration. A significantly higher 30-day mortality was observed in men vs women (23.4% vs 19.2%; P = .039). Trial Numbers: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Hospitalization , Sex Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Disease Progression , Female , Heart Disease Risk Factors , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
20.
Intern Emerg Med ; 16(4): 957-966, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33165755

ABSTRACT

Recently the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has been declared a pandemic. Despite its aggressive extension and significant morbidity and mortality, risk factors are poorly characterized outside China. We designed a registry, HOPE COVID-19 (NCT04334291), assessing data of 1021 patients discharged (dead or alive) after COVID-19, from 23 hospitals in 4 countries, between 8 February and 1 April. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality aiming to produce a mortality risk score calculator. The median age was 68 years (IQR 52-79), and 59.5% were male. Most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (46.8%) and dyslipidemia (35.8%). A relevant heart or lung disease were depicted in 20%. And renal, neurological, or oncological disease, respectively, were detected in nearly 10%. Most common symptoms were fever, cough, and dyspnea at admission. 311 patients died and 710 were discharged alive. In the death-multivariate analysis, raised as most relevant: age, hypertension, obesity, renal insufficiency, any immunosuppressive disease, 02 saturation < 92% and an elevated C reactive protein (AUC = 0.87; Hosmer-Lemeshow test, p > 0.999; bootstrap-optimist: 0.0018). We provide a simple clinical score to estimate probability of death, dividing patients in four grades (I-IV) of increasing probability. Hydroxychloroquine (79.2%) and antivirals (67.6%) were the specific drugs most commonly used. After a propensity score adjustment, the results suggested a slight improvement in mortality rates (adjusted-ORhydroxychloroquine 0.88; 95% CI 0.81-0.91, p = 0.005; adjusted-ORantiviral 0.94; 95% CI 0.87-1.01; p = 0.115). COVID-19 produces important mortality, mostly in patients with comorbidities with respiratory symptoms. Hydroxychloroquine could be associated with survival benefit, but this data need to be confirmed with further trials. Trial Registration: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Propensity Score , Registries , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Spain , Survival Rate
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL