Dyslipidemia and Inflammation as Hallmarks of Oxidative Stress in COVID-19: A Follow-Up Study.

Recent works have demonstrated a significant reduction in cholesterol levels and increased oxidative stress in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The cause of this alteration is not well known. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate their possible association during the evolution of COVID-19. This is an observational prospective study. The primary endpoint was to analyze the association between lipid peroxidation, lipid, and inflammatory profiles in COVID-19 patients. A multivariate regression analysis was employed. The secondary endpoint included the long-term follow-up of lipid profiles. COVID-19 patients presented significantly lower values in their lipid profile (total, low, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) with greater oxidative stress and inflammatory response compared to the healthy controls. Lipid peroxidation was the unique oxidative parameter with a significant association with the total cholesterol (OR: 0.982; 95% CI: 0.969-0.996; p = 0.012), IL1-RA (OR: 0.999; 95% CI: 0.998-0.999; p = 0.021) IL-6 (OR: 1.062; 95% CI: 1.017-1.110; p = 0.007), IL-7 (OR: 0.653; 95% CI: 0.433-0.986; p = 0.042) and IL-17 (OR: 1.098; 95% CI: 1.010-1.193; p = 0.028). Lipid abnormalities recovered after the initial insult during long-term follow-up (IQR 514 days); however, those with high LPO levels at hospital admission had, during long-term follow-up, an atherogenic lipid profile. Our study suggests that oxidative stress in COVID-19 is associated with derangements of the lipid profile and inflammation. Survivors experienced a recovery in their lipid profiles during long-term follow-up, but those with stronger oxidative responses had an atherogenic lipid profile.

Real-World Multicenter Coronary Lithotripsy Registry: Long-Term Clinical Follow-Up.

OBJECTIVES: Coronary lithotripsy (CL) works by fracturing the calcified plaque, allowing mean area gain, enhancing vessel compliance, and facilitating stent deployment. This study reports the safety, effectiveness, and durability of the clinical benefit of CL at long-term follow-up of a real-world multicenter registry. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study that included consecutive patients with calcified lesions undergoing CL from August, 2018 to October, 2020 with a clinical follow-up of 20 months (interquartile range, 14.5-25). Exclusion criteria were a target lesion located in a vessel <2.5 mm and/or the presence of dissection prior to CL. The primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE, defined as death or target-lesion revascularization [TLR] or myocardial infarction [MI]) at follow-up. RESULTS: This registry included 109 patients (128 lesions). The population was elderly (mean age, 74 years old), with high rates of diabetic patients (58%), renal insufficiency (32%), and multivessel disease (76%). Most of the lesions were predilated with semicompliant/noncompliant balloons (25 with cutting balloon). Rotational atherectomy was used in 20 lesions. On average, CL required the use of 1 balloon delivering a mean of 60 pulses. Twelve patients presented with ST-segment-elevation MI and a culprit calcified coronary lesion undergoing CL. Successful CL was achieved in 99% of cases. There were few procedural complications, with 30-day freedom from MACE rate of 98%. The MACE rate at long-term follow-up was 5.6%. CONCLUSION: This is the first real-world, multicenter registry that confirms the safety and long-term efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention for calcified lesions using CL in an unselected and high-risk population with a low long-term follow-up MACE rate.

Exercise Intolerance in Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 and the Value of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing- a Mini-Review.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with systemic organ damage in the most severe forms. Long-term complications of SARS-CoV-2 appear to be restricted to severe presentations of COVID-19, but many patients with persistent symptoms have never been hospitalized. Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) represents a heterogeneous group of symptoms characterized by cardiovascular, general, respiratory, and neuropsychiatric sequelae. The pace of evidence acquisition with PASC has been rapid, but the mechanisms behind it are complex and not yet fully understood. In particular, exercise intolerance shares some features with other classic respiratory and cardiac disorders. However, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) provides a comprehensive assessment and can unmask the pathophysiological mechanism behind exercise intolerance in gray-zone PASC. This mini-review explores the utility of CPET and aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of PASC by summarizing the current evidence.

Myocardial Injury in COVID-19 and Its Implications in Short- and Long-Term Outcomes.

COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still a pandemic with high mortality and morbidity rates. Clinical manifestation is widely variable, including asymptomatic or mild respiratory tract illness to severe pneumonia and death. Myocardial injury is a significant pathogenic feature of COVID-19 and it is associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, mainly due to a higher number of hospital readmissions, with over 50% mortality. These findings suggest that myocardial injury would identify COVID-19 patients with higher risk during active infection and mid-term follow-up. Potential contributors responsible for myocardial damage are myocarditis, vasculitis, acute inflammation, type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction. However, there are few data about cardiac sequelae and its long-term consequences. Thus, the optimal screening tool for residual cardiac sequelae, clinical follow-up, and the benefits of a specific cardiovascular therapy during the convalescent phase remains unknown. This mini-review explores the different mechanisms of myocardial injury related to COVID-19 and its short and long-term implications.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis.

Background: Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. Methods: We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. Results: Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (-0.151 [95% CI -0.218, -0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (-0.167 [95% CI -0.220, -0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [-0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224-0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42-0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. Conclusion: Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Introducción: La hipertensión es una condición prevalente entre los pacientes infectados por el SARS-CoV-2. Es controvertido si los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona (SRAA) son beneficiosos o perjudiciales. Métodos: Hemos desarrollado un estudio comparativo nacional retrospectivo y no experimental en 2 hospitales terciarios para evaluar el impacto del uso crónico de inhibidores del SRAA en pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Se realizó un metaanálisis para reforzar los hallazgos. Resultados: De 849 pacientes, 422 (49,7%) eran hipertensos y 310 (73,5%) tomaban inhibidores del SRAA al inicio del estudio. Los pacientes hipertensos eran mayores, tenían más comorbilidades y una mayor incidencia de insuficiencia respiratoria (−0,151; IC 95%: [−0,218; −0,084]). La mortalidad global en los pacientes hipertensos fue del 28,4%, pero fue menor entre los que tenían prescritos inhibidores del SRAA antes (−0,167; IC 95%: [−0,220; −0,114]) y durante la hospitalización (0,090; [−0,008; 0,188]). Se observaron hallazgos similares tras 2 emparejamientos de puntuación de propensión que evaluaron el beneficio de los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina y los bloqueadores de los receptores de angiotensina entre los pacientes hipertensos. El análisis de regresión logística multivariante de los pacientes hipertensos reveló que la edad, la diabetes mellitus, la proteína C reactiva y la insuficiencia renal se asociaban de forma independiente con la mortalidad por todas las causas. Por el contrario, los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina disminuyeron el riesgo de muerte (OR 0,444; IC 95%: 0,224-0,881). El metaanálisis indicó un beneficio protector de los inhibidores del SRAA (OR 0,6; IC 95%: 0,42-0,8) entre los hipertensos con COVID-19. Conclusión: Nuestros datos indican que los inhibidores del SRAA pueden desempeñar un papel protector en los pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Este hallazgo fue apoyado por un metaanálisis de la evidencia actual. Su mantenimiento durante la estancia hospitalaria puede no afectar negativamente a los resultados de la COVID-19.

Cardio-Pulmonary Dysfunction Evaluation in Patients with Persistent Post-COVID-19 Headache.

Background (1): Headache is a prevalent symptom experienced during ongoing SARS-CoV-2 infection, but also weeks after recovery. Whether cardio-pulmonary dysfunction contributes causally to headache persistence is unknown. Methods (2): We conducted a case-control analysis nested in a prospective cohort study. Individuals were recruited from August 2020 to December 2020. Patients were grouped according to the presence or absence of long-COVID headache for three months after COVID-19 resolution. We compared demographic data, clinical variables, cardio-pulmonary laboratory biomarkers, quality of life, and cardio-pulmonary function between groups. Results (3): A cohort of 70 COVID-19 patients was evaluated. Patients with headaches (n = 10; 14.3%) were more frequently female (100% vs. 58.4%; p = 0.011) and younger (46.9 ± 8.45 vs. 56.13 ± 12 years; p = 0.023). No between-group differences in laboratory analysis, resting echocardiography, cardio-pulmonary exercise test, or pulmonary function tests were observed. Conclusion (4): In this exploratory study, no significant differences in cardio-pulmonary dysfunction were observed between patients with and without long-COVID headache during mid-term follow-up.

Chronic use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis / Uso crónico de los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona en pacientes con COVID-19 e hipertensión arterial: Resultados de un registro español y metaanálisis

Background:Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial.Methods:We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings.Results:Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (−0.151 [95% CI −0.218, −0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (−0.167 [95% CI −0.220, −0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [−0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224–0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42–0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19.Conclusion:Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes. (AU)

Introducción:La hipertensión es una condición prevalente entre los pacientes infectados por el SARS-CoV-2. Es controvertido si los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona (SRAA) son beneficiosos o perjudiciales.Métodos:Hemos desarrollado un estudio comparativo nacional retrospectivo y no experimental en 2 hospitales terciarios para evaluar el impacto del uso crónico de inhibidores del SRAA en pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Se realizó un metaanálisis para reforzar los hallazgos.Resultados:De 849 pacientes, 422 (49,7%) eran hipertensos y 310 (73,5%) tomaban inhibidores del SRAA al inicio del estudio. Los pacientes hipertensos eran mayores, tenían más comorbilidades y una mayor incidencia de insuficiencia respiratoria (−0,151; IC 95%: [−0,218; −0,084]). La mortalidad global en los pacientes hipertensos fue del 28,4%, pero fue menor entre los que tenían prescritos inhibidores del SRAA antes (−0,167; IC 95%: [−0,220; −0,114]) y durante la hospitalización (0,090; [−0,008; 0,188]). Se observaron hallazgos similares tras 2 emparejamientos de puntuación de propensión que evaluaron el beneficio de los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina y los bloqueadores de los receptores de angiotensina entre los pacientes hipertensos. El análisis de regresión logística multivariante de los pacientes hipertensos reveló que la edad, la diabetes mellitus, la proteína C reactiva y la insuficiencia renal se asociaban de forma independiente con la mortalidad por todas las causas. Por el contrario, los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina disminuyeron el riesgo de muerte (OR 0,444; IC 95%: 0,224-0,881). El metaanálisis indicó un beneficio protector de los inhibidores del SRAA (OR 0,6; IC 95%: 0,42-0,8) entre los hipertensos con COVID-19. (AU)

Thalassaemia is paradoxically associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital complications and mortality in COVID-19: Data from an international registry.

Although numerous patient-specific co-factors have been shown to be associated with worse outcomes in COVID-19, the prognostic value of thalassaemic syndromes in COVID-19 patients remains poorly understood. We studied the outcomes of 137 COVID-19 patients with a history of transfusion-dependent thalassaemia (TDT) and transfusion independent thalassaemia (TIT) extracted from a large international cohort and compared them with the outcomes from a matched cohort of COVID-19 patients with no history of thalassaemia. The mean age of thalassaemia patients included in our study was 41 ± 16 years (48.9% male). Almost 81% of these patients suffered from TDT requiring blood transfusions on a regular basis. 38.7% of patients were blood group O. Cardiac iron overload was documented in 6.8% of study patients, whereas liver iron overload was documented in 35% of study patients. 40% of thalassaemia patients had a history of splenectomy. 27.7% of study patients required hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection. Amongst the hospitalized patients, one patient died (0.7%) and one patient required intubation. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was required in almost 5% of study patients. After adjustment for age-, sex- and other known risk factors (cardiac disease, kidney disease and pulmonary disease), the rate of in-hospital complications (supplemental oxygen use, admission to an intensive care unit for CPAP therapy or intubation) and all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the thalassaemia group compared to the matched cohort with no history of thalassaemia. Amongst thalassaemia patients in general, the TIT group exhibited a higher rate of hospitalization compared to the TDT group (p = 0.001). In addition, the rate of complications such as acute kidney injury and need for supplemental oxygen was significantly higher in the TIT group compared to the TDT group. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, age and history of heart or kidney disease were all found to be independent risk factors for increased in-hospital, all-cause mortality, whereas the presence of thalassaemia (either TDT or TIT) was found to be independently associated with reduced all-cause mortality. The presence of thalassaemia in COVID-19 patients was independently associated with lower in-hospital, all-cause mortality and few in-hospital complications in our study. The pathophysiology of this is unclear and needs to be studied in vitro and in animal models.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. METHODS: We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. RESULTS: Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (-0.151 [95% CI -0.218, -0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (-0.167 [95% CI -0.220, -0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [-0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224-0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42-0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels are associated with poor clinical outcomes in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the sole causative agent of coronavirus infectious disease-19 (COVID-19). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective single-center study of consecutively admitted patients between March 1st and May 15th, 2020, with a definitive diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary end-point was to evaluate the association of lipid markers with 30-days all-cause mortality in COVID-19. A total of 654 patients were enrolled, with an estimated 30-day mortality of 22.8% (149 patients). Non-survivors had lower total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) levels during the entire course of the disease. Both showed a significant inverse correlation with inflammatory markers and a positive correlation with lymphocyte count. In a multivariate analysis, LDL-c ≤ 69 mg/dl (hazard ratio [HR] 1.94; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-3.31), C-reactive protein >88 mg/dl (HR 2.44; 95% CI, 1.41-4.23) and lymphopenia <1000 (HR 2.68; 95% CI, 1.91-3.78) at admission were independently associated with 30-day mortality. This association was maintained 7 days after admission. Survivors presented with complete normalization of their lipid profiles on short-term follow-up. CONCLUSION: Hypolipidemia in SARS-CoV-2 infection may be secondary to an immune-inflammatory response, with complete recovery in survivors. Low LDL-c serum levels are independently associated with higher 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Exercise Ventilatory Inefficiency in Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: Insights from a Prospective Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a systemic disease characterized by a disproportionate inflammatory response in the acute phase. This study sought to identify clinical sequelae and their potential mechanism. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-center study (NCT04689490) of previously hospitalized COVID-19 patients with and without dyspnea during mid-term follow-up. An outpatient group was also evaluated. They underwent serial testing with a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET), transthoracic echocardiogram, pulmonary lung test, six-minute walking test, serum biomarker analysis, and quality of life questionaries. RESULTS: Patients with dyspnea (n = 41, 58.6%), compared with asymptomatic patients (n = 29, 41.4%), had a higher proportion of females (73.2 vs. 51.7%; p = 0.065) with comparable age and prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. There were no significant differences in the transthoracic echocardiogram and pulmonary function test. Patients who complained of persistent dyspnea had a significant decline in predicted peak VO2 consumption (77.8 (64-92.5) vs. 99 (88-105); p < 0.00; p < 0.001), total distance in the six-minute walking test (535 (467-600) vs. 611 (550-650) meters; p = 0.001), and quality of life (KCCQ-23 60.1 ± 18.6 vs. 82.8 ± 11.3; p < 0.001). Additionally, abnormalities in CPET were suggestive of an impaired ventilatory efficiency (VE/VCO2 slope 32 (28.1-37.4) vs. 29.4 (26.9-31.4); p = 0.022) and high PETCO2 (34.5 (32-39) vs. 38 (36-40); p = 0.025). INTERPRETATION: In this study, >50% of COVID-19 survivors present a symptomatic functional impairment irrespective of age or prior hospitalization. Our findings suggest a potential ventilation/perfusion mismatch or hyperventilation syndrome.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: the SARS-CoV-2 infection ranges from asymptomatic to critical forms and several prognostic factors have been described. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations where it is linked with more complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic information of AF in this population. METHODS: retrospective analysis of a cohort of 517 patients consecutively admitted in a tertiary hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided the patients in two groups according the development of AF and compared the main features of both groups. An univariable and multivariable analysis of mortality were also performed. RESULTS: among 517 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in a tertiary center, 54 (10.4%) developed AF. These patients are older (81.6 vs 66.5 years old, p < 0.001) and present more hypertension (74% vs 47%, p < 0.001), cardiomyopathy (9% vs 1%, p = 0.002), previous heart failure admission (9% vs 0.4%, p < 0.001), previous episodes of AF (83% vs 1%, p < 0.001) and bigger left atrium (47.8 vs 39.9 mm, p < 0.001). AF COVID-19 patients present more acute respiratory failure (72% vs 40%, p < 0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (50% vs 22%, p < 0.001). Predictors of AF development are age and previous AF. AF is not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Predictors are age, creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL at admission, LDH > 250 UI/L at admission and acute respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Atrial fibrillation appears in 10% of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients present more comorbidities and two-fold increase in hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation is not an independent prognostic factor.

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO: La infección por SARS-CoV-2 presenta un amplio espectro clínico, y varios factores pronósticos han sido descritos. La fibrilación auricular (FA) es frecuente en situaciones agudas, donde se ha relacionado con aumento de complicaciones y mortalidad. Nuestro objetivo ha sido evaluar el impacto pronóstico de la FA en esta población. MÉTODOS: Análisis retrospectivo de una cohorte de 517 pacientes con infección SARS-CoV-2 consecutivamente ingresados en un hospital terciario. Dividimos a los pacientes en dos grupos de acuerdo al desarrollo de FA durante el ingreso y comparamos las características de los grupos. Realizamos análisis univariado y multivariado de mortalidad. RESULTADOS: De los 517 pacientes, 54 (10,4%) desarrollaron FA. Estos pacientes son mayores (81,6 vs. 66,5 años, p < 0,001) y presentan más hipertensión (74% vs. 47%, p < 0,001), miocardiopatía (9% vs. 1%, p = 0,002), ingreso previo por insuficiencia cardiaca (9% vs. 0,4%, p < 0,001), historia de FA (83% vs. 1%, p < 0,001) y mayor aurícula izquierda (47,8 vs. 39,9 mm, p < 0,001). Los pacientes con FA presentan más fallo respiratorio agudo (72% vs. 40%, p < 0,001) y mayor mortalidad hospitalaria (50% vs. 22%, p < 0,001). Los predictores de FA son la edad y la historia de FA previa. La FA no es un predictor independiente de mortalidad hospitalaria. Los predictores son: edad, creatinina > 1,5 mg/dL al ingreso, LDH > 250 U/L al ingreso y el fallo respiratorio agudo. CONCLUSIÓN: La FA aparece en el 10% de los pacientes hospitalizados por SARS-CoV-2. Estos presentan mayor comorbilidad y el doble de mortalidad hospitalaria, pero la FA no es un factor pronóstico independiente.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Introduction and objective: The SARS-CoV-2 infection ranges from asymptomatic to critical forms and several prognostic factors have been described. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations where it is linked with more complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic information of AF in this population.Methodsretrospective analysis of a cohort of 517 patients consecutively admitted in a tertiary hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided the patients in two groups according the development of AF and compared the main features of both groups. An univariable and multivariable analysis of mortality were also performed.Resultsamong 517 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in a tertiary center, 54 (10.4%) developed AF. These patients are older (81.6 vs 66.5 years old, p<0.001) and present more hypertension (74% vs 47%, p<0.001), cardiomyopathy (9% vs 1%, p=0.002), previous heart failure admission (9% vs 0.4%, p<0.001), previous episodes of AF (83% vs 1%, p<0.001) and bigger left atrium (47.8 vs 39.9mm, p<0.001). AF COVID-19 patients present more acute respiratory failure (72% vs 40%, p<0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (50% vs 22%, p<0.001). Predictors of AF development are age and previous AF. AF is not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Predictors are age, creatinine>1.5mg/dL at admission, LDH>250UI/L at admission and acute respiratory failure.ConclusionAtrial fibrillation appears in 10% of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients present more comorbidities and two-fold increase in hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation is not an independent prognostic factor. (AU)

Introducción y objetivo: La infección por SARS-CoV-2 presenta un amplio espectro clínico, y varios factores pronósticos han sido descritos. La fibrilación auricular (FA) es frecuente en situaciones agudas, donde se ha relacionado con aumento de complicaciones y mortalidad. Nuestro objetivo ha sido evaluar el impacto pronóstico de la FA en esta población.MétodosAnálisis retrospectivo de una cohorte de 517 pacientes con infección SARS-CoV-2 consecutivamente ingresados en un hospital terciario. Dividimos a los pacientes en dos grupos de acuerdo al desarrollo de FA durante el ingreso y comparamos las características de los grupos. Realizamos análisis univariado y multivariado de mortalidad.ResultadosDe los 517 pacientes, 54 (10,4%) desarrollaron FA. Estos pacientes son mayores (81,6 vs. 66,5 años, p<0,001) y presentan más hipertensión (74% vs. 47%, p<0,001), miocardiopatía (9% vs. 1%, p=0,002), ingreso previo por insuficiencia cardiaca (9% vs. 0,4%, p<0,001), historia de FA (83% vs. 1%, p<0,001) y mayor aurícula izquierda (47,8 vs. 39,9mm, p<0,001). Los pacientes con FA presentan más fallo respiratorio agudo (72% vs. 40%, p<0,001) y mayor mortalidad hospitalaria (50% vs. 22%, p<0,001). Los predictores de FA son la edad y la historia de FA previa. La FA no es un predictor independiente de mortalidad hospitalaria. Los predictores son: edad, creatinina >1,5mg/dL al ingreso, LDH>250U/L al ingreso y el fallo respiratorio agudo.ConclusiónLa FA aparece en el 10% de los pacientes hospitalizados por SARS-CoV-2. Estos presentan mayor comorbilidad y el doble de mortalidad hospitalaria, pero la FA no es un factor pronóstico independiente. (AU)

The COVID-19 lab score: an accurate dynamic tool to predict in-hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

Deterioration is sometimes unexpected in SARS-CoV2 infection. The aim of our study is to establish laboratory predictors of mortality in COVID-19 disease which can help to identify high risk patients. All patients admitted to hospital due to Covid-19 disease were included. Laboratory biomarkers that contributed with significant predictive value for predicting mortality to the clinical model were included. Cut-off points were established, and finally a risk score was built. 893 patients were included. Median age was 68.2 ± 15.2 years. 87(9.7%) were admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and 72(8.1%) needed mechanical ventilation support. 171(19.1%) patients died. A Covid-19 Lab score ranging from 0 to 30 points was calculated on the basis of a multivariate logistic regression model in order to predict mortality with a weighted score that included haemoglobin, erythrocytes, leukocytes, neutrophils, lymphocytes, creatinine, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, procalcitonin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and D-dimer. Three groups were established. Low mortality risk group under 12 points, 12 to 18 were included as moderate risk, and high risk group were those with 19 or more points. Low risk group as reference, moderate and high patients showed mortality OR 4.75(CI95% 2.60-8.68) and 23.86(CI 95% 13.61-41.84), respectively. C-statistic was 0-85(0.82-0.88) and Hosmer-Lemeshow p-value 0.63. Covid-19 Lab score can very easily predict mortality in patients at any moment during admission secondary to SARS-CoV2 infection. It is a simple and dynamic score, and it can be very easily replicated. It could help physicians to identify high risk patients to foresee clinical deterioration.

Impact of the presence of heart disease, cardiovascular medications and cardiac events on outcome in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular risk factors and usage of cardiovascular medication are prevalent among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Little is known about the cardiovascular implications of COVID-19. The goal herein, was to evaluate the prognostic impact of having heart disease (HD) and taking cardiovascular medications in a population diagnosed of COVID-19 who required hospitalization. Also, we studied the development of cardiovascular events during hospitalization. METHODS: Consecutive patients with definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 made by a positive real time- -polymerase chain reaction of nasopharyngeal swabs who were admitted to the hospital from March 15 to April 14 were included in a retrospective registry. The association of HD with mortality and with mortality or respiratory failure were the primary and secondary objectives, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 859 patients were included in the present analysis. Cardiovascular risk factors were related to death, particularly diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio in the multivariate analysis: 1.810 [1.159- -2.827], p = 0.009). A total of 113 (13.1%) patients had HD. The presence of HD identified a group of patients with higher mortality (35.4% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001) but HD was not independently related to prognosis; renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, diuretics and beta-blockers did not worsen prognosis. Statins were independently associated with decreased mortality (0.551 [0.329-0.921], p = 0.023). Cardiovascular events during hospitalization identified a group of patients with poor outcome (mortality 31.8% vs. 19.3% without cardiovascular events, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of HD is related to higher mortality. Cardiovascular medications taken before admission are not harmful, statins being protective. The development of cardiovascular events during the course of the disease is related to poor outcome.

Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From a Multicenter International Prospective Registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019 [HOPE-COVID19]).

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.

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.

[Atrial fibrillation in patients with COVID-19. Usefulness of the CHA2DS2-VASc score: an analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 registry]. / Fibrilación auricular en pacientes con COVID-19. Utilidad de la puntuación CHA2DS2-VASc: un análisis del registro internacional HOPE COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations, where it is associated with more complications and higher mortality. METHODS: Analysis of the international HOPE registry (NCT04334291). The objective was to assess the prognostic information of AF in COVID-19 patients. A multivariate analysis and propensity score matching were performed to assess the relationship between AF and mortality. We also evaluated the impact on mortality and embolic events of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in these patients. RESULTS: Among 6217 patients enrolled in the HOPE registry, 250 had AF (4.5%). AF patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. After propensity score matching, these differences were attenuated. Despite this, patients with AF had a higher incidence of in-hospital complications such as heart failure (19.3% vs 11.6%, P = .021) and respiratory insufficiency (75.9% vs 62.3%, P = .002), as well as a higher 60-day mortality rate (43.4% vs 30.9%, P = .005). On multivariate analysis, AF was independently associated with higher 60-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.234; 95%CI, 1.003-1.519). CHA2DS2-VASc score acceptably predicts 60-day mortality in COVID-19 patients (area ROC, 0.748; 95%CI, 0.733-0.764), but not its embolic risk (area ROC, 0.411; 95%CI, 0.147-0.675). CONCLUSIONS: AF in COVID-19 patients is associated with a higher number of complications and 60-day mortality. The CHA2DS2-VASc score may be a good risk marker in COVID patients but does not predict their embolic risk.