Should Physicians Be Aware of Rhythm Disturbances in Adults with Systemic Autoimmune Diseases and Anti-Ro52 Antibodies? A Cross-Sectional Study.

Objectives: The association between anti-Ro/SSA antibodies and the appearance of cardiac rhythm disorders in adults is discussed. We aim to study this relationship, together with active treatments and comorbidities, and its impact on daily clinical practice in adults with systemic autoimmune diseases (SADs). Methods: This cross-sectional single-center study was conducted in a tertiary hospital between January 2021 and March 2022. A sample of adult patients followed up in the SAD Unit with a diagnosis of a SAD and previously tested for anti-Ro/SSA and anti-La/SSB were recruited. All of them underwent a 12-lead electrocardiogram. Results: 167 patients were included. 90 (53.9%) were positive for anti-Ro60, 101 (60.5%) for anti-Ro52, and 45 (26.9%) for anti-La/SSB; 52 (31.3%) were triple-negative. 84% were women, and the mean age was 59 years (standard deviation 12.8). The most common SAD was primary Sjögren's syndrome (34.8%), followed by systemic lupus erythematosus (24.6%) and rheumatoid arthritis (22.8%). A statistically significant relationship was found between anti-Ro52 positivity and cardiac rhythm disorders (relative risk = 2.007 [1.197-3.366]), specifically QTc prolongation (relative risk = 4.248 [1.553-11.615]). Multivariate regressions showed a significant association, with diabetes mellitus being the most related comorbidity. The association between anti-Ro52 antibodies and atrioventricular conduction disorders was not significant. Conclusions: The presence of anti-Ro52 antibodies in adult patients with SADs is associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation. Electrocardiographic screening of patients with SAD, anti-Ro52 antibodies, and other risk factors, like diabetes mellitus or QT-prolonging drugs, seems advisable. Those with baseline electrocardiogram abnormalities or additional risk factors should undergo electrocardiographic monitoring.

Effect of intravenous pulses of methylprednisolone 250 mg versus dexamethasone 6 mg in hospitalised adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: An open-label randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of high versus medium doses of glucocorticoids for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 has shown mixed outcomes in controlled trials and observational studies. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of methylprednisolone 250 mg bolus versus dexamethasone 6 mg in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: A randomised, open-label, controlled trial was conducted between February and August 2021 at four hospitals in Spain. The trial was suspended after the first interim analysis since the investigators considered that continuing the trial would be futile. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for up to 10 days or methylprednisolone 250 mg once daily for 3 days. RESULTS: Of the 128 randomised patients, 125 were analysed (mean age 60 ± 17 years; 82 males [66%]). Mortality at 28 days was 4.8% in the 250 mg methylprednisolone group versus 4.8% in the 6 mg dexamethasone group (absolute risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -8.8 to 9.1%]; p = 0.98). None of the secondary outcomes (admission to the intensive care unit, non-invasive respiratory or high-flow oxygen support, additional immunosuppressive drugs, or length of stay), or prespecified sensitivity analyses were statistically significant. Hyperglycaemia was more frequent in the methylprednisolone group at 27.0 versus 8.1% (absolute risk difference, -18.9% [95% CI, -31.8 to - 5.6%]; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Among severe but not critical patients with COVID-19, 250 mg/d for 3 days of methylprednisolone compared with 6 mg/d for 10 days of dexamethasone did not result in a decrease in mortality or intubation.

Corticosteroid Pulses for Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Effects on Mortality.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the influence of corticosteroid pulses on 60-day mortality in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: We designed a multicenter retrospective cohort study in three teaching hospitals of Castilla y León, Spain (865,096 people). We selected patients with confirmed COVID-19 and lung involvement with a pO2/FiO2<300, excluding those exposed to immunosuppressors before or during hospitalization, patients terminally ill at admission, or those who died in the first 24 hours. We performed a propensity score matching (PSM) adjusting covariates that modify the probability of being treated. Then, we used a Cox regression model in the PSM group to consider factors affecting mortality. RESULTS: From 2933 patients, 257 fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. 124 patients were on corticosteroid pulses (250 mg of methylprednisolone for three days), and 133 were not. 30.3% (37/122) of patients died in the corticosteroid pulse group and 42.9% (57/133) in the nonexposed cohort. These differences (12.6%, 95% CI [8·54-16.65]) were statically significant (log-rank 4.72, p = 0, 03). We performed PSM using the exact method. Mortality differences remained in the PSM group (log-rank 5.31, p = 0.021) and were still significant after a Cox regression model (HR for corticosteroid pulses 0.561; p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence about treatment with corticosteroid pulses in severe COVID-19 that might significantly reduce mortality. Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria with that selection process set a reliable frame to compare mortality in both the exposed and nonexposed groups.