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 & controlABSTRACT
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 OutcomeABSTRACT
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/epidemiologyABSTRACT
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/epidemiologyABSTRACT
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 & purificationABSTRACT
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-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Isolated tricuspid valve surgery is a rarely performed procedure and traditionally is associated with a bad prognosis, although its clinical outcomes still are little known. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term clinical outcomes obtained at our center after isolated tricuspid valve surgery as treatment for severe tricuspid regurgitation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 71 consecutive patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation who underwent isolated tricuspid valve surgery between December 1996 and December 2017. Perioperative and long-term mortality, tricuspid valve reoperation, and functional class were analyzed after follow up. RESULTS: Regarding surgery, 7% of patients received a De Vega annuloplasty, 14.1% an annuloplasty ring, 11.3% a mechanical prosthesis, and 67.6% a biological prosthesis. Perioperative mortality was 12.7% and no variable was shown to be predictive of this event. After a median follow up of 45.5 months, long-term mortality was 36.6%, and the multivariate analysis identified atrial fibrillation as the only predictor (Hazard Ratio 3.014, 95% confidence interval 1.06-8.566; P = 0.038). At the end of follow up, 63.6% of survivors had functional class I. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated tricuspid valve surgery was infrequent in our center. Perioperative mortality was high, as was long-term mortality. However, a high percentage of survivors were barely symptomatic after follow up.
Subject(s)
Cardiac Valve Annuloplasty/methods , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Tricuspid Valve/surgery , Aged , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reoperation , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Spain/epidemiology , Survival Rate/trends , Treatment Outcome , Tricuspid Valve/diagnostic imaging , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/diagnosis , Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/mortalityABSTRACT
Real-world registries have been critical to building the scientific knowledge of rare diseases, including Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH). In the past 4 decades, a considerable number of registries on this condition have allowed to improve the pathology and its subgroups definition, to advance in the understanding of its pathophysiology, to elaborate prognostic scales and to check the transferability of the results from clinical trials to clinical practice. However, in a moment where a huge amount of data from multiple sources is available, they are not always taken into account by the registries. For that reason, Machine Learning (ML) offer a unique opportunity to manage all these data and, finally, to obtain tools that may help to get an earlier diagnose, to help to deduce the prognosis and, in the end, to advance in Personalized Medicine. Thus, we present a narrative revision with the aims of, in one hand, summing up the aspects in which data extraction is important in rare diseases -focusing on the knowledge gained from PAH real-world registries- and, on the other hand, describing some of the achievements and the potential use of the ML techniques on PAH.
Subject(s)
Machine Learning , Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension , Registries , Humans , Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension/diagnosis , Prognosis , Hypertension, Pulmonary/diagnosisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) who develop cardiogenic shock may present with left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO). The prognosis and treatment of this population have not been defined in previous studies. The aim of this study is to describe the clinical presentation, management, evolution and prognosis of a subgroup of patients with TTS and cardiogenic shock according to whether they present with LVOTO or not. METHODS: We analysed patients with TTS recruited from 2003 to 2022 in a multicentre registry. Patients were selected if they presented cardiogenic shock during their admission. This analysis was compared according to the presence or absence of LVOTO. RESULTS: 322 patients were included, 58 (18%) of whom had LVOTO. The majority were treated with vasoactive and inotropic therapy (VIT) and its use was strongly associated with having LVOTO (77.6% vs 57.6%, p<0.001). Only five (3.3%) patients without LVOTO and two (4.4%) in the LVOTO group treated with VIT developed or worsened the obstruction. Furthermore, patients with LVOTO presented higher in-hospital complications including ventricular arrhythmias (15.5% vs 8.7%, p=0.017), major bleeding (13.8% vs 6.1%, p=0.042) and acute kidney failure (48.3% vs 28.4%, p=0.003). However, at both 90 days and 5 years, the cumulative incidence of all-cause death was not significantly different between the patients with and without LVOTO (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.40 for 90 days, and HR 1.69, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.21 for 5 years). CONCLUSIONS: LVOTO is not uncommon in patients with TTS and cardiogenic shock. It is associated with a more aggressive in-hospital course and our data is unable to rule out an association between the presence of LVOTO and long-term prognosis of patients with TTS. The development or worsening of LVOTO directly related to inotropic or vasoactive support was low.
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 StudiesABSTRACT
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is an infrequent disorder characterized by high blood pressure in the pulmonary arteries. It may lead to premature death or the requirement for lung and/or heart transplantation. Genetics plays an important and increasing role in the diagnosis of PAH. Here, we report seven additional patients with variants in SOX17 and a review of sixty previously described patients in the literature. Patients described in this study suffered with additional conditions including large septal defects, as described by other groups. Collectively, sixty-seven PAH patients have been reported so far with variants in SOX17, including missense and loss-of-function (LoF) variants. The majority of the loss-of-function variants found in SOX17 were detected in the last exon of the gene. Meanwhile, most missense variants were located within exon one, suggesting a probable tolerated change at the amino terminal part of the protein. In addition, we reported two idiopathic PAH patients presenting with the same variant previously detected in five patients by other studies, suggesting a possible hot spot. Research conducted on PAH associated with congenital heart disease (CHD) indicated that variants in SOX17 might be particularly prevalent in this subgroup, as two out of our seven additional patients presented with CHD. Further research is still necessary to clarify the precise association between the biological pathway of SOX17 and the development of PAH.
Subject(s)
Heart Defects, Congenital , Heart Septal Defects , Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension , Humans , Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension/genetics , Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension/diagnosis , Familial Primary Pulmonary Hypertension , Pulmonary Artery , SOXF Transcription Factors/geneticsABSTRACT
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/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Background: Despite many recent advances in heart failure (HF) therapies, there remains an unmet need in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) for adequate treatment and follow-up, with the potential to reduce associated mortality and morbidity. Increased intracardiac and intrapulmonary pressures have been shown to precede the onset of symptoms of decompensated HF by several days or even weeks, so there have been several attempts to influence the prognosis of HF by monitoring through various methods. One of these is ambulatory pulmonary pressure monitoring to guide treatment in anticipation of decompensation. Case summary: We present the case of a 65-year-old woman with rheumatic valve disease and mechanical aortic and mitral prosthesis since 2003 and pacemaker since 2014, with development of severe tricuspid regurgitation in 2018 and with new valve implantation and multiple decompensations of HFpEF despite optimal medical treatment. Under follow-up in the Heart Failure Unit and after multiple unsuccessful treatment adjustments, it was decided to implant a pulmonary artery pressure monitoring device-CardioMEMS®-in order to optimize patient follow-up and treatment. The procedure was carried out without complications and early optimization of treatment was possible, resulting in a significant reduction in decompensations and admissions for HF. Discussion: Ambulatory pulmonary pressure monitoring is shown to be a safe and effective option to anticipate treatment of heart failure decompensation even with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, with a significantly positive impact on hospital readmissions and consequent benefit on morbidity and mortality.
ABSTRACT
In potentially severe diseases in general and COVID-19 in particular, it is vital to early identify those patients who are going to progress to severe disease. A recent living systematic review dedicated to predictive models in COVID-19, critically appraises 145 models, 8 of them focused on prediction of severe disease and 23 on mortality. Unfortunately, in all 145 models, they found a risk of bias significant enough to finally "not recommend any for clinical use". Authors suggest concentrating on avoiding biases in sampling and prioritising the study of already identified predictive factors, rather than the identification of new ones that are often dependent on the database. Our objective is to develop a model to predict which patients with COVID-19 pneumonia are at high risk of developing severe illness or dying, using basic and validated clinical tools. We studied a prospective cohort of consecutive patients admitted in a teaching hospital during the "first wave" of the COVID-19 pandemic. Follow-up to discharge from hospital. Multiple logistic regression selecting variables according to clinical and statistical criteria. 404 consecutive patients were evaluated, 392 (97%) completed follow-up. Mean age was 61 years; 59% were men. The median burden of comorbidity was 2 points in the Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index, CRB was abnormal in 18% of patients and basal oxygen saturation on admission lower than 90% in 18%. A model composed of Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index, CRB score and basal oxygen saturation can predict unfavorable evolution or death with an area under the ROC curve of 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.89), and 0.90 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.94), respectively. Prognosis of COVID-19 pneumonia can be predicted without laboratory tests using two classic clinical tools and a pocket pulse oximeter.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Models, Statistical , Oxygen Saturation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has been a cause of significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Among the short- and long-term consequences of COVID-19, myocarditis is a disease to be taken into consideration. Myocarditis, in general, is related to a poor prognosis. However, the epidemiology and prognosis of myocarditis related to COVID-19 are currently unknown. While vaccination against COVID-19 is of great benefit at a public health level, the risk of myocarditis should be considered in the context of the global benefits of vaccination. In this narrative review, we will summarize the etiopathogenic bases, the epidemiology, the clinical manifestations, the course, diagnosis, prognosis, and the treatment of myocarditis related to SARS-CoV-2, as well as myocarditis secondary to mRNA vaccines.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of poor prognosis in previously healthy young individuals admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. All patients without co-morbidities, without usual treatments and ≤65 years old were selected from an international registry (HOPE-COVID-19, NCT04334291). We focused on baseline variables-symptoms and signs at admission-to analyse risk factors for poor prognosis. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse clinical events during hospitalization including mortality, mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, prone, sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and embolic events. RESULTS: Overall, 773 healthy young patients were included. The primary composite end point was observed in 29% (225/773) and the overall mortality rate was 3.6% (28/773). In the combined event group, 75% (168/225) of patients were men and the mean age was 49 (±11) years, whereas in the non-combined event group, the prevalence of male gender was 43% (238/548) and the mean age was 42 (±13) years (p < 0.001 for both). On admission, respiratory insufficiency and cough were described in 51.4% (114/222) and 76% (170/223) of patients, respectively, in the combined event group, versus 7.9% (42/533) and 56% (302/543) of patients in the other group (p < 0.001 for both). The strongest independent predictor for the combined end point was desaturation (Spo2 <92%) (OR 5.40; 95% CI 3.34-8.75; p < 0.001), followed by tachypnoea (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.93-5.21; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 3.01; 95% CI 1.96-4.61; p < 0.001) and pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray at admission (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.18-4.16; p 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Major adverse clinical events were unexpectedly high considering the baseline characteristics of the cohort. Signs of respiratory compromise at admission and male gender, were predictive for poor prognosis among young healthy patients hospitalized with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Aged , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
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, ArtificialABSTRACT
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 StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The initial data of the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes - ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction COVID-19 showed in Europe a remarkable reduction in primary percutaneous coronary intervention procedures and higher in-hospital mortality during the initial phase of the pandemic as compared with the prepandemic period. The aim of the current study was to provide the final results of the registry, subsequently extended outside Europe with a larger inclusion period (up to June 2020) and longer follow-up (up to 30 days). METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentre registry in 109 high-volume primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) centres from Europe, Latin America, South-East Asia and North Africa, enrolling 16 674 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing PPPCI in March/June 2019 and 2020. The main study outcomes were the incidence of PPCI, delayed treatment (ischaemia time >12 hours and door-to-balloon >30 min), in-hospital and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: In 2020, during the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in PPCI as compared with 2019 (incidence rate ratio 0.843, 95% CI 0.825 to 0.861, p<0.0001). This reduction was significantly associated with age, being higher in older adults (>75 years) (p=0.015), and was not related to the peak of cases or deaths due to COVID-19. The heterogeneity among centres was high (p<0.001). Furthermore, the pandemic was associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon time (40 (25-70) min vs 40 (25-64) min, p=0.01) and total ischaemia time (225 (135-410) min vs 196 (120-355) min, p<0.001), which may have contributed to the higher in-hospital (6.5% vs 5.3%, p<0.001) and 30-day (8% vs 6.5%, p=0.001) mortality observed during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous revascularisation for STEMI was significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with a 16% reduction in PPCI procedures, especially among older patients (about 20%), and longer delays to treatment, which may have contributed to the increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiologists/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Time-to-Treatment/trends , Aged , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The majority of familial hypercholesterolemia index cases (FH-IC) remain underdiagnosed and undertreated because there are no well-defined strategies for the universal detection of FH. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of an active screening for FH-IC based on centralized analytical data. From 2016 to 2019, a clinical screening of FH was performed on 469 subjects with severe hypercholesterolemia (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥220 mg/dL), applying the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria. All patients with a DLCN ≥ 6 were genetically tested, as were 10 patients with a DLCN of 3-5 points to compare the diagnostic yield between the two groups. FH was genetically confirmed in 57 of the 84 patients with DLCN ≥ 6, with a genetic diagnosis rate of 67.9% and an overall prevalence of 12.2% (95% confidence interval: 9.3% to 15.5%). Before inclusion in the study, only 36.8% (n = 21) of the patients with the FH mutation had been clinically diagnosed with FH; after genetic screening, FH detection increased 2.3-fold (p < 0.001). The sequential, active screening strategy for FH-IC increases the diagnostic yield for FH with a rational use of the available resources, which may facilitate the implementation of FH universal and family-based cascade screening strategies.