Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Clin Med ; 10(12)2021 06 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34204453

ABSTRACT

Most studies investigating early risk predictors in coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) lacked comparison with controls. We aimed to assess and directly compare outcomes and risk predictors at time of emergency department (ED) presentation in COVID-19 and controls. Consecutive patients presenting to the ED with suspected COVID-19 were prospectively enrolled. COVID-19-patients were compared with (i) patients tested negative (overall controls) and (ii) patients tested negative, who had a respiratory infection (respiratory controls). Primary outcome was the composite of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death at 30 days. Among 1081 consecutive cases, 191 (18%) were tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and 890 (82%) were tested negative (overall controls), of which 323 (30%) had a respiratory infection (respiratory controls). Incidence of the composite outcome was significantly higher in COVID-19 (23%) as compared with the overall control group (10%, adjusted-HR 2.45 (95%CI, 1.61-3.74), p < 0.001) or the respiratory control group (10%, adjusted-HR 2.93 (95%CI, 1.66-5.17), p < 0.001). Blood oxygen saturation, age, high-sensitivity troponin, c-reactive protein, and lactate dehydrogenase were identified as the strongest predictors of poor outcome available at time of ED presentation in COVID-19 with highly comparable prognostic utility in overall and respiratory controls. In conclusion, patients presenting to the ED with COVID-19 have a worse outcome than controls, even after adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics. Most predictors of poor outcome in COVID-19 were not restricted to COVID-19, but of comparable prognostic utility in controls and therefore generalizable to unselected patients with suspected COVID-19.

2.
Open Heart ; 5(2): e000910, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30613414

ABSTRACT

Background: Bariatric surgery reduces cardiovascular risk in obese patients. Heart failure (HF) is associated with an increased perioperative risk following bariatric surgery. This systematic review aimed to assemble the evidence on bariatric surgery in patients with known HF and the potential effect of bariatric surgery on incident HF in obese patients without prevalent HF. Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search up to 30 September 2017 and included studies comparing bariatric surgery to non-surgical treatment in patients with known presurgical HF. To assess whether bariatric surgery has any effect on incident HF, we also assembled studies looking at new-onset HF among patients without HF prior to surgery. Results: We found five observational studies (0 randomised trials) comparing bariatric surgery with non-surgical treatment in patients with a diagnosis of HF prior to surgery. A review of the available studies (n=676 patients) suggested reduced admission rates for HF exacerbation and increased left ventricular ejection fraction after bariatric surgery. No meta-analysis was possible due to the heterogeneous nature of these studies. Seven studies (one randomised trial) reported data on new-onset HF in obese patients without HF prior to bariatric surgery (n=111 127 patients). When comparing surgical to non-surgical treatment groups, the pooled univariable and multivariable HRs for incident HF were 0.28 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.55) and 0.44 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.55), respectively. Conclusion: In this systematic review, no randomised trial assessed the benefits and risks of bariatric surgery in obese patients with concomitant HF. Available studies do, however, show that surgery might prevent incident HF.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...