Feasibility and Outcomes of a Cardiovascular Medicine Inclusive Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Service.

Background: There has been a significant increase in the utilization of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in recent years. Cardiothoracic surgery teams have historically led VA-ECMO care teams, with little data available on alternative care models. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of a cardiovascular medicine inclusive VA-ECMO service, analyzing patients treated with peripheral VA-ECMO at a large quaternary care center from 2018 to 2022. The primary outcome was death while on VA-ECMO or within 24 hours of decannulation. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of the primary outcome. Results: Two hundred forty-four patients were included in the analysis (median age 61 years; 28.7% female), of whom 91.8% were cannulated by interventional cardiologists, and 84.4% were managed by a cardiology service comprised of interventional cardiologists, cardiac intensivists or advanced heart failure cardiologists. Indications for VA-ECMO included acute myocardial infarction (34.8%), decompensated heart failure (30.3%), and refractory cardiac arrest (10.2%). VA-ECMO was utilized during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 26.6% of cases, 48% of which were peri-procedural arrest. Of the patients, 46% survived to decannulation, the majority of whom were decannulated percutaneously in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. There was no difference in survival following cannulation by a cardiac surgeon vs interventional cardiologist (50% vs 45%; P = .90). Complications included arterial injury (3.7%), compartment syndrome (4.1%), cannulation site infection (1.2%), stroke (14.8%), acute kidney injury (52.5%), access site bleeding (16%) and need for blood transfusion (83.2%). Elevated baseline lactate (odds ratio [OR], 1.13 per unit increase) and sequential organ failure assessment score (OR, 1.27 per unit increase) were independently associated with the primary outcome. Conversely, an elevated baseline survival after VA ECMO score (OR, 0.92 per unit increase) and 8-hour serum lactate clearance (OR, 0.98 per % increase) were independently associated with survival. Conclusions: The use of a cardiovascular medicine inclusive ECMO service is feasible and may be practical in select centers as indications for VA-ECMO expand.

STEMI in a patient with recent intracranial hemorrhage.

A 63-year-old male patient with a history of hypertension presented to the emergency department with a one-day history of dizziness, nausea, and vomiting.

Outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in individuals with natural and hybrid immunity.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection outcomes among individuals with previous infection (natural immunity) and previous infection plus vaccination (hybrid immunity) are limited. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among patients with hybrid immunity (cases) and natural immunity (controls) from March 2020 to February 2022. Reinfection was defined as positive PCR> 90 days after initial laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcomes included time to reinfection, symptom severity, COVID-19-related hospitalization, critical COVID-19 illness (need for intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death), length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 773 (42%) vaccinated and 1073 (58%) unvaccinated patients with reinfection were included. Most patients (62.7%) were asymptomatic. Median time to reinfection was longer with hybrid immunity (391 [311-440] vs 294 [229-406] days, p < 0.001). Cases were less likely to be symptomatic (34.1% vs 39.6%, p = 0.001) or develop critical COVID-19 (2.3% vs 4.3%, p = 0.023). However, there was no significant difference in rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization (2.6% vs 3.8%, p = 0.142) or LOS (5 [2-9] vs 5 [3-10] days, p = 0.446). Boosted patients had longer time to reinfection (439 [IQR 372-467] vs 324 [IQR 256-414] days, p < 0.001) and were less likely to be symptomatic (26.8% vs 38%, p = 0.002) compared to unboosted patients. Rates of hospitalization, progression to critical illness and LOS were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Natural and hybrid immunity provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and hospitalization. However, hybrid immunity conferred stronger protection against symptomatic disease and progression to critical illness and was associated with longer time to reinfection. The stronger protection conferred by hybrid immunity against severe outcomes due to COVID-19 should be emphasized with the public to further the vaccination effort, especially in high-risk individuals.

Infliximab-Induced Lupus in a Patient With Psoriatic Arthritis Who Presented With Cardiac Tamponade: A Case Report.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory condition, and the proinflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) plays a major pathogenic role in the development and progression of PsA. Anti-TNF-α therapies, such as the monoclonal antibody infliximab, are used to treat patients whose PsA has not responded favorably to conventional anti-rheumatic drugs. However, exposure to anti-TNF-α therapeutics can lead to drug-induced lupus erythematosus (DILE), which may rarely be accompanied by cardiac manifestations. Here, we describe a rare case of drug-induced lupus erythematosus secondary to infliximab therapy for PsA and psoriasis in a patient who presented with life-threatening acute pericarditis and cardiac tamponade. Newly developed skin rashes, newly elevated autoimmune indicators, and punch biopsy results indicating subacute cutaneous lupus collectively supported a DILE diagnosis within the context of infliximab use. Pericardiocentesis, colchicine, and corticosteroids alleviated symptoms, and infliximab was replaced with alternate therapy. This case highlights the importance of early recognition of the possible serious and uncommon adverse reactions from infliximab therapy. Prompt initiation of appropriate treatment and discontinuation of the offending agent are critical in cases of drug-induced lupus erythematosus, particularly when rare cardiac complications occur.