Multimorbidity Profile of COVID-19 Deaths in Portugal during 2020.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection and has reached pandemic proportions. Since then, several clinical characteristics have been associated with poor outcomes. This study aimed to describe the morbidity profile of COVID-19 deaths in Portugal. METHODS: A study was performed including deaths certificated in Portugal with "COVID-19" (ICD-10: U07.1 or U07.2) coded as the underlying cause of death from the National e-Death Certificates Information System between 16 March and 31 December 2020. Comorbidities were derived from ICD-10 codes using the Charlson and Elixhauser indexes. The resident Portuguese population estimates for 2020 were used. RESULTS: The study included 6701 deaths (death rate: 65.1 deaths/100,000 inhabitants), predominantly males (72.1). The male-to-female mortality ratio was 1.1. The male-to-female mortality rate ratio was 1.2; however, within age groups, it varied 5.0-11.4-fold. COVID-19 deaths in Portugal during 2020 occurred mainly in individuals aged 80 years or older, predominantly in public healthcare institutions. Uncomplicated hypertension, uncomplicated diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, renal failure, cardiac arrhythmias, dementia, and cerebrovascular disease were observed among COVID-19 deceased patients, with prevalences higher than 10%. A high prevalence of zero morbidities was registered using both the Elixhauser and Charlson comorbidities lists (above 40.2%). Nevertheless, high multimorbidity was also identified at the time of COVID-19 death (about 36.5%). Higher multimorbidity levels were observed in men, increasing with age up to 80 years old. Zero-morbidity prevalence and high multimorbidity prevalences varied throughout the year 2020, seemingly more elevated in the mortality waves' peaks, suggesting variation according to the degree of disease incidence at a given period. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides detailed sociodemographic and clinical information on all certificated deaths from COVID-19 in Portugal during 2020, showing complex and extreme levels of morbidity (zero-morbidity vs. high multimorbidity) dynamics during the first year of the pandemic in Portugal.

Different retinopathy phenotypes in type 2 diabetes predict retinopathy progression.

PURPOSE: To characterize the progression in retinopathy severity of different phenotypes of mild nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes and mild NPDR (ETDRS 20 or 35) were followed in a 5-year longitudinal study. Examinations, including color fundus photography (CFP) and optical coherence tomography (OCT and OCTA), were performed at baseline, 6 months and then annually. Phenotype classification was performed based on microaneurysm turnover (MAT, on CFP) and central retinal thickness (CRT, on OCT). Phenotype A is characterized by low MAT (< 6) and normal CRT; Phenotype B by low MAT (< 6) and increased CRT; and Phenotype C by higher MAT (≥ 6) with or without increased CRT. ETDRS grading of seven fields CFP was performed at the initial and last visits. RESULTS: Analysis of ETDRS grade step changes showed significant differences in diabetic retinopathy (DR) progression between the different phenotypes (p < 0.001). Of the 66 participants with phenotype A only 2 eyes (3%) presented 2-or-more-step worsening. None of the 50 participants characterized as phenotype B developed 2-step worsening, whereas 13 eyes (23.2%) characterized as phenotype C had 2-or-more-steps worsening. Phenotype C presents the higher risk for 2-or-more step worsening (OR: 15.94 95% CI: 3.45-73.71; p < 0.001) and higher sensitivity, correctly identifying 86.7% of cases at risk (AUC: 0.84 95% CI: 0.72-0.96; p < 0.001). Diabetic retinopathy severity progression was associated with HbA1c (p = 0.019), LDL levels (p = 0.043), and ocular factors as MAT (p = 0.010), MA formation rate (p = 0.014) and MA disappearance rate (p = 0.005). Capillary closure at 5-year follow-up, identified by lower vessel density (VD) on OCTA, was also associated with diabetic DR severity progression (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Different DR phenotypes in type 2 diabetes show different risks of retinopathy progression. Phenotype C is associated with increased HbA1c values and presents a higher risk of a 2-or-more-step worsening of the ETDRS severity score.

Retinopathy Phenotypes in Type 2 Diabetes with Different Risks for Macular Edema and Proliferative Retinopathy.

Our group reported that three diabetic retinopathy (DR) phenotypes: A, characterized by low microaneurysm turnover (MAT < 6) and normal central retinal thickness (CRT); B, low MAT (<6) and increased CRT, and C, high MAT (≥6), present different risks for development of macular edema (DME) and proliferative retinopathy (PDR). To test these findings, 212 persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and mild nonproliferative retinopathy (NPDR), one eye per person, were followed for five years with annual visits. Of these, 172 completed the follow-up or developed an outcome: PDR or DME (considering both clinically significant macular edema (CSME) and center-involved macular edema (CIME)). Twenty-seven eyes (16%) developed either CSME (14), CIME (10), or PDR (4), with one eye developing both CSME and PDR. Phenotype A showed no association with development of vision-threatening complications. Seven eyes with phenotype B and three with phenotype C developed CIME. Phenotype C showed higher risk for CSME development, with 17.41 odds ratio (p = 0.010), compared with phenotypes A + B. All eyes that developed PDR were classified as phenotype C. Levels of HbA1c and triglycerides were increased in phenotype C (p < 0.001 and p = 0.018, respectively). In conclusion, phenotype C identifies eyes at higher risk for development of CSME and PDR, whereas phenotype A identifies eyes at very low risk for vision-threatening complications.