Improvement of Early Outcomes in Type A Acute Aortic Syndrome After an Aorta Code Implementation.

BACKGROUND: Reduction of variability through process reengineering can improve surgical results for patients with type A acute aortic syndrome. We compare short-term results before and after implementation of an Aorta Code for patients with type A acute aortic syndrome who underwent surgery. METHODS: The Aorta Code was implemented in a 5-hospital healthcare network in 2019. This critical pathway was based on a simple diagnostic algorithm, ongoing training, immediate patient transfer, and treatment by an expert multidisciplinary team. We retrospectively compared all patients operated on in our center before (2005-2018) and after (January 2019 to February 2023) its implementation. RESULTS: One hundred two and 70 patients underwent surgery in the precode and code periods, respectively. In the code period the number of patients operated on per year increased (from 7.3 to 16.8), and the median elapsed time until diagnosis (6.5 hours vs 4.2 hours), transfer (4 hours vs 2.2 hours), and operating room (2.7 hours vs 1.8 hours) were significantly shorter (P < .05). Aortic root repair and total arch replacement were more frequent (66.7% vs 82.9% [P = .003] and 20.6% vs 40% [P = .001]). Cardiopulmonary bypass and ischemia times were also shorter (179.7 minutes vs 148.2 minutes [P = .001] and 105 minutes vs 91.2 minutes [P = .022]). Incidence of prolonged mechanical ventilation (53.9% vs 34.3%, P = .011), major stroke (17.7% vs 7.1%, P = .047), and 30-day mortality (27.5% vs 7.1%, P = .001) decreased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: An Aorta Code can be successfully implemented by using a standardized protocol within a hospital network. The number of cases increased; time to diagnosis, transfer, and operating room were reduced; and 30- day mortality significantly decreased.

Chest Pain in Cancer Patients: Prevalence of Myocardial Infarction and Performance of High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponins.

Background: Little is known about patients with cancer presenting with acute chest discomfort to the emergency department (ED). Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), outcomes, and the diagnostic utility of recommended diagnostic tools in this population. Methods: Patients presenting with chest pain to the ED were prospectively enrolled in an international multicenter diagnostic study with central adjudication. Cancer status was assessed prospectively and additional cancer details retrospectively. Findings were externally validated in an independent multicenter cohort. Results: Among 8,267 patients, 711 (8.6%) had cancer. Patients with cancer had a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors and pre-existing cardiac disease. Total length of stay in the ED (5.2 hours vs 4.3 hours) and hospitalization rate (49.8% vs 34.3%) were both increased in patients with cancer (P < 0.001 for both). Among 8,093 patients eligible for the AMI analyses, those with cancer more often had final diagnoses of AMI (184 of 686 with cancer [26.8%] vs 1,561 of 7,407 without cancer [21.1%]; P < 0.001). In patients with cancer, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) but not high sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) concentration had lower diagnostic accuracy for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (for hs-cTnT, area under the curve: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.86-0.92] vs 0.94 [95% CI: 0.93-0.94] [P < 0.001]; for hs-cTnI, area under the curve: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.91-0.95] vs 0.95 [95% CI: 0.94-0.95] [P = 0.10]). In patients with cancer, the European Society of Cardiology 0/1-hour hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI algorithms maintained very high safety but had lower efficacy, with twice the number of patients remaining in the observe zone. Similar findings were obtained in the external validation cohort. Conclusions: Patients with cancer have a substantially higher prevalence of AMI as the cause of chest pain. Length of ED stay and hospitalization rates are increased. The diagnostic performance of hs-cTnT and the efficacy of both the European Society of Cardiology 0/1-hour hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI algorithms is reduced. (Advantageous Predictors of Acute Coronary Syndromes Evaluation [APACE] Study; NCT00470587).

Effects of MIdazolam versus MOrphine in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: An analysis of MIMO trial.

AIMS: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an important comorbidity in heart failure. The MIMO trial showed that patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE) treated with midazolam had fewer serious adverse events than those treated with morphine. In this post hoc analysis, we examined whether the presence/ absence of COPD modifies the reduced risk of midazolam over morphine. METHODS: Patients >18 years old clinically diagnosed with ACPE and with dyspnea and anxiety were randomized (1:1) at emergency department arrival to receive either intravenous midazolam or morphine. In this post hoc analysis, we calculated the relative risk (RR) of serious adverse events in patients with and without COPD. Calculating the CochranMantel-Haenszel interaction test, we evaluated if COPD modified the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam arm compared to morphine. RESULTS: Overall, 25 (22.5%) of the 111 patients randomized had a history of COPD. Patients with COPD were more commonly men with a history of previous episodes of heart failure, than participants without COPD. In the COPD group, the RR for the incidence of serious adverse events in the midazolam versus morphine arm was 0.36 (95%CI, 0.1-1.46). In the group without COPD, the RR was 0.44 (95%CI, 0.22-0.91). The presence of COPD did not modify the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam arm compared to morphine (p for interaction =0.79). CONCLUSIONS: The reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam group compared with morphine is similar in patients with and without COPD.

Midazolam versus morphine in acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema patients with and without atrial fibrillation: findings from the MIMO trial.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: The MIMO clinical trial showed that patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema (ACPE) treated with midazolam had fewer serious adverse events than those treated with morphine. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common comorbidity in heart failure and affects patient's outcome. OBJECTIVE: The primary endpoint of this substudy is to know if AF modified the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam arm compared to morphine. The first secondary endpoint is to know if AF modified the reduced risk of serious adverse events or death at 30 days in the midazolam arm. The second secondary objective of this substudy is to analyze whether AF modified the reduced risk of midazolam against morphine on the total number of serious adverse events per patient. DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of the MIMO trial. Patients more than 18 years old clinically diagnosed with ACPE and with dyspnea and anxiety were randomized (1:1) at emergency department arrival to receive either intravenous midazolam or morphine. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: In this post hoc analysis, we calculated the relative risk (RR) of serious adverse events in patients with and without AF. Calculating the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel interaction test, we evaluated if AF modified the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam arm compared to morphine. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred eleven patients (median = 78.9 years; IQR, 72.3-83.7; women, 52.2%) were randomized in the MIMO trial, 55 to receive midazolam and 56 to morphine. All randomized patients received the assigned drug and there were no losses to follow-up. Forty-four patients (39.6%) had AF. In the AF group, the RR for the incidence of serious adverse events in the midazolam versus morphine arm was 0.42 (95% CI, 0.14-1.3). In the group without AF, the RR was 0.46 (95% CI, 0.21-1). The presence of AF did not modify the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam arm compared with morphine ( P for interaction = 0.88). CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis of the MIMO trial suggests that the reduced risk of serious adverse events in the midazolam group compared to morphine is similar in patients with and without AF.

Effects of midazolam vs morphine in patients with acute pulmonary edema with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a secondary analysis of data from the MIMO trial. / Efectos del midazolam frente a la morfina en pacientes con edema agudo de pulmón con disfunción sistólica ventricular izquierda: un análisis secundario del ensayo MIMO.

OBJECTIVES: The midazolam vs morphine (MIMO) trial showed that patients treated with midazolam had fewer serious adverse events than those treated with morphine. In many patients with acute pulmonary edema, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is preserved, at 50% or higher. We aimed to determine whether left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction (D), defined by an LVEF of less than 50%, modifies the protective effect of midazolam vs morphine. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MIMO trial randomized 111 patients with acute pulmonary edema to receive intravenous midazolam in 1-mg doses to a maximum of 3 mg (n = 55) or morphine in 2- to 4-mg doses to a maximum of 8 mg (n= 56). We calculated the relative risk (RR) for a serious adverse event in patients with and without systolic LVD. RESULTS: LVEF was preserved in 84 (75.7%) of the patients with acute pulmonary edema. In patients with systolic LVD, 4 patients (26.9%) in the midazolam arm vs 6 (50%) in the morphine arm developed serious adverse events (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4). In patients without systolic LVD, 6 patients (15%) in the midazolam arm vs 18 (40.9%) in the morphine arm experienced such events (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.83). The presence of systolic LVD did not modify the protective effect of midazolam on serious adverse effects (P=.57). CONCLUSION: The effect of midazolam vs morphine in protecting against the development of serious adverse events or death is similar in patients with and without systolic LVD.

OBJETIVO: El ensayo clínico MIMO demostró que los pacientes con edema agudo de pulmón (EAP) tratados con midazolam tenían menos eventos adversos graves (EAG) que los tratados con morfina. Muchos pacientes con EAP tienen fracción de eyección del ventrículo izquierdo (FEVI) preservada ($ 50%). El objetivo fue conocer si la disfunción sistólica ventricular izquierda (DSVI) (fracción eyección ventrículo izquierdo 50%) modifica el efecto protector del midazolam frente a la morfina. METODO: El estudio MIMO asignó al azar 111 pacientes con EAP a tratamiento con midazolam (dosis de 1 mg intravenosa, hasta una dosis máxima de 3 mg, n = 55) o morfina (dosis de 2-4 mg, hasta una dosis máxima de 8 mg, n = 56). Se calculó el riesgo relativo (RR) de padecer un EAG en pacientes con y sin DSVI. RESULTADOS: La FEVI preservada estuvo presente en 84 (75,7%) pacientes con EAP. En el grupo con DSVI, 4 pacientes (26,9%) en el brazo midazolam frente a 6 (50%) en el brazo morfina presentaron EAG (RR = 0,53; IC 95: 0,2-1,4). En el grupo sin DSVI 6 pacientes (15%) del brazo midazolam frente a 18 (40,9%) del brazo morfina presentaron EAG (RR = 0,37; IC 95: 0,16-0,83). La DSVI no modificó el efecto protector del midazolam en la aparición de EAG con respecto a la morfina (p = 0,57). CONCLUSIONES: En pacientes con EAP el efecto protector del midazolam sobre la morfina en la aparición de EAG y EAG o muerte fue similar en pacientes con y sin DSVI.

Efectos del midazolam frente a la morfina en pacientes con edema agudo de pulmón con disfunción sistólica ventricular izquierda: un análisis secundario del ensayo MIMO / Effects of midazolam vs morphine in patients with acute pulmonary edema with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a secondary analysis of data from the MIMO trial

Objetivo. El ensayo clínico MIMO demostró que los pacientes con edema agudo de pulmón (EAP) tratados con midazolam tenían menos eventos adversos graves (EAG) que los tratados con morfina. Muchos pacientes con EAP tienen fracción de eyección del ventrículo izquierdo (FEVI) preservada ($ 50%). El objetivo fue conocer si la disfunción sistólica ventricular izquierda (DSVI) (fracción eyección ventrículo izquierdo < 50%) modifica el efecto protector del midazolam frente a la morfina.Método. El estudio MIMO asignó al azar 111 pacientes con EAP a tratamiento con midazolam (dosis de 1 mg intravenosa, hasta una dosis máxima de 3 mg, n = 55) o morfina (dosis de 2-4 mg, hasta una dosis máxima de 8 mg, n = 56). Se calculó el riesgo relativo (RR) de padecer un EAG en pacientes con y sin DSVI.Resultado. La FEVI preservada estuvo presente en 84 (75,7%) pacientes con EAP. En el grupo con DSVI, 4 pacientes (26,9%) en el brazo midazolam frente a 6 (50%) en el brazo morfina presentaron EAG (RR = 0,53; IC 95: 0,2-1,4). En el grupo sin DSVI 6 pacientes (15%) del brazo midazolam frente a 18 (40,9%) del brazo morfina presentaron EAG (RR = 0,37; IC 95: 0,16-0,83). La DSVI no modificó el efecto protector del midazolam en la aparición de EAG con respecto a la morfina (p = 0,57)Conclusiones. En pacientes con EAP el efecto protector del midazolam sobre la morfina en la aparición de EAG y EAG o muerte fue similar en pacientes con y sin DSVI. (AU)

Background and objective. The midazolam vs morphine (MIMO) trial showed that patients treated with midazolam had fewer serious adverse events than those treated with morphine. In many patients with acute pulmonary edema, the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is preserved, at 50% or higher. We aimed to determine whether left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction (D), defined by an LVEF of less than 50%, modifies the protective effect of midazolam vs morphine. Methods. The MIMO trial randomized 111 patients with acute pulmonary edema to receive intravenous midazolam in 1-mg doses to a maximum of 3 mg (n = 55) or morphine in 2- to 4-mg doses to a maximum of 8 mg (n= 56). We calculated the relative risk (RR) for a serious adverse event in patients with and without systolic LVD. Results. LVEF was preserved in 84 (75.7%) of the patients with acute pulmonary edema. In patients with systolic LVD, 4 patients (26.9%) in the midazolam arm vs 6 (50%) in the morphine arm developed serious adverse events (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4). In patients without systolic LVD, 6 patients (15%) in the midazolam arm vs 18 (40.9%) in the morphine arm experienced such events (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.83). The presence of systolic LVD did not modify the protective effect of midazolam on serious adverse effects (P=.57). Conclusions. The effect of midazolam vs morphine in protecting against the development of serious adverse eventsor death is similar in patients with and without systolic LVD. (AU)

One-Year Changes in Optic Nerve Head Parameters in Recovered COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The main purpose was to evaluate the changes in peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and vessel density (VD) in post-COVID-19 patients during 12-month follow-up. METHODS: In this prospective study, patients with COVID-19 who were attended in the Hospital Clinico San Carlos (Madrid, Spain) were included. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmological examination, optic nerve head optical coherence tomography (OCT), and OCT angiography (OCTA) using the Cirrus HD-OCT 5,000 with AngioPlex OCTA 1, 3, and 12 months after laboratory-confirmed diagnosis. Sociodemographic data, medical history, disease severity, and laboratory workup were registered. RESULTS: A total of 180 eyes of 90 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included; the mean age was 55.5 ± 8.9 years, and 46 patients (51%) were females. The mean visual acuity was 0.76 ± 0.16, and no abnormalities attributable to SARS-CoV-2 were detected in the ocular or fundus examination. No differences in the OCT and OCTA data were found between severity groups in each visit (all P > 0.05). Overall, there was a decrease in RNFL global thickness ( P < 0.001) from the first to the last visit, and an increase in VD and flux index was noted in some sectors at the 12-month examination. A significant correlation was detected at 12 months between vascularization parameters and RNFL thickness. CONCLUSIONS: One year after SARS-CoV-2 infection, changes in peripapillary RNFL thickness and vascularization occur, possibly indicating a recovery in such parameters.

Midazolam versus morphine in acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema: results of a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: Benzodiazepines have been used as safe anxiolytic drugs for decades and some authors have suggested they could be an alternative for morphine for treating acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPE). We compared the efficacy and safety of midazolam and morphine in patients with ACPE. METHODS AND RESULTS: A randomized, multicentre, open-label, blinded endpoint clinical trial was performed in seven Spanish emergency departments (EDs). Patients >18 years old clinically diagnosed with ACPE and with dyspnoea and anxiety were randomized (1:1) at ED arrival to receive either intravenous midazolam or morphine. Efficacy was assessed by in-hospital all-cause mortality (primary endpoint). Safety was assessed through serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, and the composite endpoint included 30-day mortality and SAE. Analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial was stopped early after a planned interim analysis by the safety monitoring committee. At that time, 111 patients had been randomized: 55 to midazolam and 56 to morphine. There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint (in-hospital mortality for midazolam vs. morphine 12.7% vs. 17.9%; risk ratio[RR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.74; p = 0.60). SAE were less common with midazolam versus morphine (18.2% vs. 42.9%; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.80; p = 0.007), as were the composite endpoint (23.6% vs. 44.6%; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.92; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Although the number of patients was too small to draw final conclusions and there were no significant differences in mortality between midazolam and morphine, a significantly higher rate of SAEs was found in the morphine group.

Safety and Revisit Related to Discharge the Sixty-one Spanish Emergency Department Medical Centers Without Hospitalization in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia. A Prospective Cohort Study UMC-Pneumonia COVID-19

ABSTRACT Background: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). Methods: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. Results: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom were discharged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176-3.037), age < 60 years (aOR 2.324; 95%CI 1.353-3.990), and lymphocyte count > 1200/mm3 (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A total of 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). Conclusion: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality.

Safety and Revisit Related to Discharge the Sixty-one Spanish Emergency Department Medical Centers Without Hospitalization in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia. A Prospective Cohort Study UMC-Pneumonia COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Information is needed on the safety and efficacy of direct discharge from the emergency department (ED) of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to study the variables associated with discharge from the ED in patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, and study ED revisits related to COVID-19 at 30 days (EDR30d). METHODS: Multicenter study of the SIESTA cohort including 1198 randomly selected COVID patients in 61 EDs of Spanish medical centers from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. We collected baseline and related characteristics of the acute episode and calculated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for ED discharge. In addition, we analyzed the variables related to EDR30d in discharged patients. RESULTS: We analyzed 859 patients presenting with COVID-19 pneumonia, 84 (9.8%) of whom weredischarged from the ED. The variables independently associated with discharge were being a woman (aOR 1.890; 95%CI 1.176 3.037), age < 60 years (aOR 2.324; 95%CI 1.353-3.990), and lymphocyte count > 1200/mm3 (aOR 4.667; 95%CI 1.045-20.839). The EDR30d of the ED discharged group was 40.0%, being lower in women (aOR 0.368; 95%CI 0.142-0.953). A totalof 130 hospitalized patients died (16.8%) as did two in the group discharged from the ED (2.4%) (OR 0.121; 95%CI 0.029-0.498). CONCLUSION: Discharge from the ED in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was infrequent and was associated with few variables of the episode. The EDR30d was high, albeit with a low mortality.

Incidence, Clinical Characteristics, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients With COVID-19: Results of the UMC-19-S12.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), who were attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID-19 patients diagnosed with UGB in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We formed 2 control groups: COVID-19 patients without UGB (control group A) and non-COVID-19 patients with UGB (control group B). Fifty-three independent variables and 4 outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 83 UGB in 74,814 patients with COVID-19 who were attending EDs (1.11%, 95% CI=0.88-1.38). This incidence was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients [2474/1,388,879, 1.78%, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.71-1.85; odds ratio (OR)=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77]. Clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 patients presenting with UGB were abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, dyspnea, expectoration, melena, fever, cough, chest pain, and dysgeusia. Compared with non-COVID-19 patients with UGB, COVID-19 patients with UGB more frequently had fever, cough, expectoration, dyspnea, abdominal pain, diarrhea, interstitial lung infiltrates, and ground-glass lung opacities. They underwent fewer endoscopies in the ED (although diagnoses did not differ between cases and control group B) and less endoscopic treatment. After adjustment for age and sex, cases showed a higher in-hospital all-cause mortality than control group B (OR=2.05, 95% CI=1.09-3.86) but not control group A (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.59-2.19) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of UGB in COVID-19 patients attending EDs was lower compared with non-COVID-19 patients. Digestive symptoms predominated over respiratory symptoms, and COVID-19 patients with UGB underwent fewer gastroscopies and endoscopic treatments than the general population with UGB. In-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients with UGB was increased compared with non-COVID patients with UGB, but not compared with the remaining COVID-19 patients.

Incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of deep venous thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 attending the Emergency Department: results of the UMC-19-S8.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: A higher incidence of venous thromboembolism [both pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis (DVT)] in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been described. But little is known about the true frequency of DVT in patients who attend emergency department (ED) and are diagnosed with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of DVT in patients with COVID-19 attending the ED before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with DVT in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, case group) during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 outbreak. We compared DVT-COVID-19 patients with COVID-19 without DVT patients (control group). Relative frequencies of DVT were estimated in COVID and non-COVID patients visiting the ED and annual standardized incidences were estimated for both populations. Sixty-three patient characteristics and four outcomes were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: We identified 112 DVT in 74 814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED [1.50‰; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.23-1.80‰]. This relative frequency was similar than that observed in non-COVID patients [2109/1 388 879; 1.52‰; 95% CI, 1.45-1.69‰; odds ratio (OR) = 0.98 [0.82-1.19]. Standardized incidence of DVT was higher in COVID patients (98,38 versus 42,93/100,000/year; OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 2.03-2.38). In COVID patients, the clinical characteristics associated with a higher risk of presenting DVT were older age and having a history of venous thromboembolism, recent surgery/immobilization and hypertension; chest pain and desaturation at ED arrival and some analytical disturbances were also more frequently seen, d-dimer >5000 ng/mL being the strongest. After adjustment for age and sex, hospitalization, ICU admission and prolonged hospitalization were more frequent in cases than controls, whereas mortality was similar (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.77-2.45). CONCLUSIONS: DVT was an unusual form of COVID presentation in COVID patients but was associated with a worse prognosis.

Optic Nerve Head Vessel Density Assessment in Recovered COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective Study Using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography.

PRECIS: Vascular diseases have been linked to alterations in optic nerve head perfusion. PURPOSE: The main objective was to investigate the changes in peripapillary vessel density (VD) in post coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: In this prospective pilot exploratory study, patients with COVID-19 that were attended in the Emergency Department of Hospital Clinico San Carlos (Madrid) were included. All patients underwent optic nerve head optical coherence tomography angiography using the Cirrus HD-OCT 500 with AngioPlex OCTA (Zeiss, Dublin, CA) 4 and 12 weeks after diagnosis by positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction test from nasopharyngeal swab at the Emergency Department. Sociodemographic data, medical history, disease severity, and laboratory work-up were collected. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty eyes of 90 patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were included. None of the patients reported visual changes. Severe patients were older, more frequently hispanic, dyslipidemic, and presented lower lymphocytes counts, as well as increased ferritin, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and international normalized ratio levels. No changes in optic nerve head vascularization were observed when both visits were compared. No correlation was found between VD and clinical parameters, disease severity and laboratory work-up. CONCLUSIONS: Changes to peripapillary VD were not observed in patients with COVID-19 in the early months following diagnosis.

Temporal distribution of emergency room visits in patients with migraine and other headaches.

Background: Headache is a leading reason for presentation to the emergency department (ED) with migraine being the most frequently headache. To ensure the adequate staffing of healthcare providers during peak times of headache visits, we analyzed the temporal distribution of emergency department visits in patients presenting with headache and/or migraine.Research design and methods: The authors conducted an ecological study, including all consecutive visits to the ED for headache. Patients were classified according to the IHS Classification. We analyzed circadian, circaseptan and circannual patterns for number of visits, comparing migraine patients with other headache patients.Results: There were 2132 ED visits for headache, including primary headache in 1367 (64.1%) cases; migraine in 963 (45.2%); secondary headache in 404 (18.9%); and unspecified headache in 366 (17.1%). The circadian pattern showed peaks around 11:00-13:00 and 17:00-19:00, with visits during the night shift 45% less frequent (p < 0.001). The circaseptan pattern showed a peak on Monday-Tuesday and a low point on Sunday (p < 0.007). The circannual pattern peaked in March and decreased in June.Conclusions: ED visits for headache showed specific circadian, circaseptan and circannual variations. No differences were found in these patterns when comparing migraine patients to other headache patients.

A case-control emergency department-based analysis of acute pancreatitis in Covid-19: Results of the UMC-19-S6.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: We investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics and outcomes of acute pancreatitis (AP) in patients with COVID-19 attending the emergency department (ED), before hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all COVID patients diagnosed with AP in 62 Spanish EDs (20% of Spanish EDs, COVID-AP) during the COVID outbreak. We formed two control groups: COVID patients without AP (COVID-non-AP) and non-COVID patients with AP (non-COVID-AP). Unadjusted comparisons between cases and controls were performed regarding 59 baseline and clinical characteristics and four outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 54 AP in 74 814 patients with COVID-19 attending the ED (frequency = 0.72‰, 95% CI = 0.54-0.94‰). This frequency was lower than in non-COVID patients (2231/1 388 879, 1.61‰, 95% CI = 1.54-1.67; OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.34-0.58). Etiology of AP was similar in both groups, being biliary origin in about 50%. Twenty-six clinical characteristics of COVID patients were associated with a higher risk of developing AP: abdominal pain (OR = 59.4, 95% CI = 23.7-149), raised blood amylase (OR = 31.8; 95% CI = 1.60-632) and vomiting (OR = 15.8, 95% CI = 6.69-37.2) being the strongest, and some inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, platelets, D-dimer) were more increased. Compared to non-COVID-AP, COVID-AP patients differed in 23 variables; the strongest ones related to COVID symptoms, but less abdominal pain was reported, pancreatic enzymes raise was lower, and severity (estimated by BISAP and SOFA score at ED arrival) was higher. The in-hospital mortality (adjusted for age and sex) of COVID-AP did not differ from COVID-non-AP (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.45-245) but was higher than non-COVID-AP (OR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.35-4.48). CONCLUSIONS: Acute pancreatitis as presenting form of COVID-19 in the ED is unusual (<1‰ cases). Some clinically distinctive characteristics are present compared to the remaining COVID patients and can help to identify this unusual manifestation. In-hospital mortality of COVID-AP does not differ from COVID-non-AP but is higher than non-COVID-AP, and the higher severity of AP in COVID patients could partially contribute to this increment.

Incidence, clinical, risk factors and outcomes of Guillain-Barré in Covid-19.

We diagnosed 11 Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) cases among 71,904 COVID patients attended at 61 Spanish emergency departments (EDs) during the 2-month pandemic peak. The relative frequency of GBS among ED patients was higher in COVID (0.15‰) than non-COVID (0.02‰) patients (odds ratio [OR] = 6.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.18-12.5), as was the standardized incidence (9.44 and 0.69 cases/100,000 inhabitant-years, respectively, OR = 13.5, 95% CI = 9.87-18.4). Regarding clinical characteristics, olfactory-gustatory disorders were more frequent in COVID-GBS than non-COVID-GBS (OR = 27.59, 95% CI = 1.296-587) and COVID-non-GBS (OR = 7.875, 95% CI = 1.587-39.09) patients. Although COVID-GBS patients were more frequently admitted to intensive care, mortality was not increased versus control groups. Our results suggest SARS-CoV-2 could be another viral infection causing GBS. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:598-603.

Risk stratification scores for patients with acute heart failure in the Emergency Department: A systematic review.

AIMS: This study aimed to systematically identify and summarise all risk scores evaluated in the emergency department setting to stratify acute heart failure patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review of PubMed and Web of Science was conducted including all multicentre studies reporting the use of risk predictive models in emergency department acute heart failure patients. Exclusion criteria were: (a) non-original articles; (b) prognostic models without predictive purposes; and (c) risk models without consecutive patient inclusion or exclusively tested in patients admitted to a hospital ward. We identified 28 studies reporting findings on 19 scores: 13 were originally derived in the emergency department (eight exclusively using acute heart failure patients), and six in emergency department and hospitalised patients. The outcome most frequently predicted was 30-day mortality. The performance of the scores tended to be higher for outcomes occurring closer to the index acute heart failure event. The eight scores developed using acute heart failure patients only in the emergency department contained between 4-13 predictors (age, oxygen saturation and creatinine/urea included in six scores). Five scores (Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade, Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade 30 Day mortality ST depression, Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency department 3 Day, Acute Heart Failure Risk Score, and Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure) have been externally validated in the same country, and two (Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade and Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure) further internationally validated. The c-statistic for Emergency Heart Failure Mortality Risk Grade to predict seven-day mortality was between 0.74-0.81 and for Multiple Estimation of risk based on Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with Acute Heart Failure to predict 30-day mortality was 0.80-0.84. CONCLUSIONS: There are several scales for risk stratification of emergency department acute heart failure patients. Two of them are accurate, have been adequately validated and may be useful in clinical decision-making in the emergency department i.e. about whether to admit or discharge.

The CRAS-EAHFE study: Characteristics and prognosis of acute heart failure episodes with cardiorenal-anaemia syndrome at the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The coexistence of other comorbidities confers poor outcomes in patients with acute heart failure. Our aim was to determine the characteristics of patients with acute heart failure and cardiorenal anaemia syndrome and the relationship between renal dysfunction and anaemia, alone or combined as cardiorenal anaemia syndrome, on short-term outcomes. METHODS: We analysed the Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency Departments registry (cohort of patients with acute heart failure in Spanish emergency departments). Renal dysfunction was defined by an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/m2, anaemia by haemoglobin values <12/<13 g/dl in women/men, and cardiorenal anaemia syndrome as the presence of both. Comparisons were made according to cardiorenal-anaemia syndrome positive (CRAS+) with respect to the rest of patients (CRAS-) and according the presence of renal dysfunction (RD+) and anaemia (A+), (alone, RD+/A-, RD-/A+) or in combination (RD+/A+; i.e. CRAS+) with respect to patients without renal dysfunction and anaemia (RD-/A-). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality, and the secondary outcomes were need for admission, prolonged hospitalisation (>10 days), in-hospital mortality during the index event, and reconsultation and the combination of 30-day post-discharge reconsultation/death. These short-term outcomes were compared and adjusted for differences among groups. RESULTS: Of the 13,307 patients analysed, CRAS+ (36.4%) was associated with older age, multiple comorbidities, chronic use of loop diuretics, oedemas and hypotension. The 30-day mortality in CRAS+ was greater than in CRAS- (hazard ratio = 1.46, 95% confidence interval = 1.26-1.68) and RD-/A- (hazard ratio = 1.83, 95% confidence interval = 1.46-2.28) control groups. The mortality level was also higher in RD+/A- (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95% confidence interval = 1.10-1.78) and higher, but not statistically significant, in RD-/A+ (hazard ratio = 1.28, 95% confidence interval = 0.99-1.63) with respect to RD-/A-. All of the secondary outcomes, when related to CRAS- and RD-/A- control groups, were worse for CRAS+ and to a lesser extent, RD+/A-, being more rarely observed in RD-/A+. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiorenal anaemia syndrome in acute heart failure is related to greater mortality and worse short-term outcomes, and the impact of renal dysfunction and anaemia seems to be additive.

Time-pattern of adverse outcomes after an infection-triggered acute heart failure decompensation and the influence of early antibiotic administration and hospitalisation: results of the PAPRICA-3 study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether patients with an acute heart failure (AHF) episode triggered by infection present different outcomes compared to patients with no trigger and the effects of early antibiotic administration (EAA) and hospitalisation. METHODS: Two groups were made according to the AHF trigger: infection (G1) or none identified (G2). The primary outcome was 13-week (91-days) all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes were 13-week post-discharge mortality, readmission or combined endpoint. Comparisons are presented as unadjusted and adjusted (MEESSI risk score) hazard ratios (uHR/aHR) for G1 compared to G2 patients, also estimated by weeks. Stratified analysis by EAA (provided/not provided) and patient disposition (discharged/hospitalised) was performed. RESULTS: We included 6727 patients (G1 = 3973; G2 = 2754). The 13-week mortality uHR was 1.11 (0.99-1.25; p = 0.06; with significant increases in the first 3 weeks), and the aHR was 0.91 (0.81-1.02; p = 0.11). There were no differences in unadjusted secondary post-discharge outcomes; however, G1 outcomes significantly improved after adjustment: aHR 0.83 (0.71-0.96; p = 0.01) for mortality, 0.92 (0.84-0.99; p = 0.04) for readmission, and 0.92 (0.85-0.99; p = 0.04) for the combined endpoint. We found a differentiated effect of hospitalisation (p < 0.05 for interaction; better post-discharge readmission and combined outcomes in G1), and a trend (p = 0.06) to lower mortality in G1 patients with EAA. Additionally, there were some differences between groups in baseline and acute episode characteristics. CONCLUSION: AHF triggered by infection is not associated with a higher mid-term mortality and has better post-discharge outcomes; however, the first 3 weeks are an extremely vulnerable period. Since hospitalisation could have a role in limiting adverse post-discharge events, and EAA in reducing mortality, these relationships should be prospectively explored in further studies.

Adherence to Mediterranean diet and prognosis in older patients scheduled to undergo cardiac resynchronization therapy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) has been associated with prolonged survival in older individuals. However, it is unknown whether adherence to MedDiet is associated with the prognosis in older patients scheduled to undergo cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between adherence to the MedDiet and clinical outcomes at 12 months follow-up after CRT implantation in older patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients adherents to the MedDiet, defined as ≥ 9 of 14 points using the PREDIMED (Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease with a Mediterranean Diet Study) questionnaire, was assessed before device implantation in patient's ≥ 70 years candidates for CRT. The primary outcome was a combined endpoint at 12 months follow-up after CRT implantation, defined as cardiovascular death, cardiac transplantation or decompensated heart failure. The cohort study consisted of 284 patients with a mean age of 73 ± 3 years. One hundred and fifty-nine (55.9%) patients were classified as adherent to the MedDiet. Seventy (24.6%) patients showed the combined endpoint at one year follow-up. Subjects who did not developed the combined endpoint had higher proportion of adherent patients to the MedDiet compared to patients who developed the combined endpoint (85% vs 67.1%, p = 0.002). After adjustment by possible confounders, the adherence to the MedDiet was a protective and significant predictor of the combined endpoint (HR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.22-0.81; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Adherence to the MedDiet is inversely associated with outcome in older patients following CRT.