The effects of primary care monitoring strategies on COVID-19 related hospitalisation and mortality: a retrospective electronic medical records review in a northern Italian province, the MAGMA study.

BACKGROUND: Most symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections produce mild to moderate symptoms. Although most patients are managed in the outpatient setting, little is known about the effect of general practitioners' (GP) management strategies on the outcomes of COVID-19 outpatients in Italy. OBJECTIVES: Describe the management of Italian GPs of SARS-CoV-2 infected adult patients and explore whether GP active care and monitoring are associated with reducing hospitalisation and death. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of SARS-CoV-2 infected adult outpatients managed by GPs in Modena (Italy) from March 2020 to April 2021. Information on management and monitoring strategies, patients' socio-demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes (hospitalisation and death due to COVID-19) were retrieved through an electronic medical record review and analysed descriptively and through multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Out of the 5340 patients from 46 GPs included in the study, 3014 (56%) received remote monitoring, and 840 (16%) had at least one home visit. More than 85% of severe or critical patients were actively monitored (73% daily) and 52% were visited at home. Changes over time in patients' therapeutic management were observed in concordance with the guidelines' release. Active daily remote monitoring and home visits were strongly associated with reduced hospitalisation rate (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33-0.80 and OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33-0.78 respectively). CONCLUSION: GPs effectively managed an increasing number of outpatients during the first waves of the pandemic. Active monitoring and home visits were associated with reduced hospitalisation in COVID-19 outpatients.

Vascular complications after balloon aortic valvuloplasty in recent years: Incidence and comparison of two hemostatic devices.

OBJECTIVES: To define the incidence of vascular complications (VC) after balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in recent years, and to compare the performance of two vascular closure devices (VCD). BACKGROUND: VC remain the most frequent drawback of BAV and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. METHODS: All BAV procedures performed at 2 high-volume centers over a 6-year period (n = 930) were collected in prospective registries and investigated to assess the incidence of Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) defined VC. Incidence of life-threatening, major and minor bleeding was also assessed. In-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rate (composite of in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, TIA/stroke, and life-threatening bleeding) as well as 30-day survival was compared between a suture-mediated closure system and a collagen plug hemostatic device. RESULTS: A 9 Fr arterial sheath was used in most of the patients (84.1%). Vascular closure was obtained with the Angio-Seal in 643 patients (69.1%) and the ProGlide in 287 (30.9%). The overall incidence of major VC was 2.7%, and minor VC 6.6%, without significant differences between groups. The Angio-Seal group was associated with a higher rate of small hematomas (6.9% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.042), whilst blood transfusions were more frequent in the ProGlide group (6.6% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.034). Rates of in-hospital MACCE and 30-day survival were similar. Use of either VCD was not independently associated with major VC. CONCLUSIONS: VC rate after BAV is fairly low in experienced centers without major differences between the 2 most used VCD.

Randomized comparison of balloon aortic valvuloplasty performed with or without rapid cardiac pacing: The pacing versus no pacing (PNP) study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) performed with or without rapid ventricular pacing (RP). BACKGROUND: BAV technique is poorly standardized. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients were randomly assigned 1:1 between BAV performed with or without RP. Exclusion criteria were an immediate indication for surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement, presentation in cardiogenic shock or pulmonary edema refractory to medical stabilization. RESULTS: There were 51 patients in the BAV group performed with RP, 49 in the BAV group without RP (noRP). Procedural success (50% hemodynamic gradient reduction) was achieved in 37.3% and 55.1%, respectively (P = 0.16). Fewer people in the noRP group complained of poor tolerance to the procedure (16% vs 41%). The primary efficacy endpoint, a 50% reduction in the mean echocardiographic trans-aortic gradient, was met in 21/49 patients in the noRP group compared to 20/51 in the RP (42.9% vs 39.2%; P = 0.84). No significant difference between the groups was observed in the primary safety endpoint, a 30-day composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute aortic regurgitation, and BARC bleeding ≥3 (8.2% noRP vs 13.7%; P = 0.53). The noRP group required fewer bailout temporary pacemakers (P = 0.048) and had a lower incidence of moderate/severe renal function worsening (4.1% vs 17.6%; P = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid ventricular pacing did not influence BAV efficacy or safety and tolerance was slightly worse.