New Insights on the Mechanisms of Myocardial Injury in Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Myocardial injury is common in hypertensive patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Immune dysregulation could be associated to cardiac injury in these patients, but the underlying mechanism has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: All patients were selected prospectively from a multicenter registry of adults hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19. Cases had hypertension and myocardial injury, defined by troponin levels above the 99th percentile upper reference limit, and controls were hypertensive patients with no myocardial injury. Biomarkers and immune cell subsets were quantified and compared between the two groups. A multiple logistic regression model was used to analyze the associations of clinical and immune variables with myocardial injury. RESULTS: The sample comprised 193 patients divided into two groups: 47 cases and 146 controls. Relative to controls, cases had lower total lymphocyte count, percentage of T lymphocytes, CD8+CD38+ mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), and percentage of CD8+ human leukocyte antigen DR isotope (HLA-DR)+ CD38-cells and higher percentage of natural killer lymphocytes, natural killer group 2A (NKG2A)+ MFI, percentage of CD8+CD38+cells, CD8+HLA-DR+MFI, CD8+NKG2A+MFI, and percentage of CD8+HLA-DR-CD38+cells. On multivariate regression, the CD8+HLA-DR+MFI, CD8+CD38+MFI, and total lymphocyte count were associated significantly with myocardial injury. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that lymphopenia, CD8+CD38+MFI, and CD8+HLA-DR+MFI are immune biomarkers of myocardial injury in hypertensive patients with COVID-19. The immune signature described here may aid in understanding the mechanisms underlying myocardial injury in these patients. The study data might open a new window for improvement in the treatment of hypertensive patients with COVID-19 and myocardial injury.

Effect of Discontinuing vs Continuing Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers on Days Alive and Out of the Hospital in Patients Admitted With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is unknown whether angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have a positive, neutral, or negative effect on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To determine whether discontinuation compared with continuation of ACEIs or ARBs changed the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial of 659 patients hospitalized in Brazil with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were taking ACEIs or ARBs prior to hospitalization (enrolled: April 9-June 26, 2020; final follow-up: July 26, 2020). Interventions: Discontinuation (n = 334) or continuation (n = 325) of ACEIs or ARBs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital through 30 days. Secondary outcomes included death, cardiovascular death, and COVID-19 progression. Results: Among 659 patients, the median age was 55.1 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46.1-65.0 years), 14.7% were aged 70 years or older, 40.4% were women, and 100% completed the trial. The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 6 days (IQR, 4-9 days) and 27.2% of patients had an oxygen saturation of less than 94% of room air at baseline. In terms of clinical severity, 57.1% of patients were considered mild at hospital admission and 42.9% were considered moderate. There was no significant difference in the number of days alive and out of the hospital in patients in the discontinuation group (mean, 21.9 days [SD, 8 days]) vs patients in the continuation group (mean, 22.9 days [SD, 7.1 days]) and the mean ratio was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01). There also was no statistically significant difference in death (2.7% for the discontinuation group vs 2.8% for the continuation group; odds ratio [OR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.38-2.52]), cardiovascular death (0.6% vs 0.3%, respectively; OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 0.19-42.12]), or COVID-19 progression (38.3% vs 32.3%; OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.95-1.80]). The most common adverse events were respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (9.6% in the discontinuation group vs 7.7% in the continuation group), shock requiring vasopressors (8.4% vs 7.1%, respectively), acute myocardial infarction (7.5% vs 4.6%), new or worsening heart failure (4.2% vs 4.9%), and acute kidney failure requiring hemodialysis (3.3% vs 2.8%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 and who were taking ACEIs or ARBs before hospital admission, there was no significant difference in the mean number of days alive and out of the hospital for those assigned to discontinue vs continue these medications. These findings do not support routinely discontinuing ACEIs or ARBs among patients hospitalized with mild to moderate COVID-19 if there is an indication for treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04364893.

Chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention in Latin America.

OBJECTIVES: To report clinical, angiographic characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of unsuccessful procedures in patients who underwent chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in Latin America. BACKGROUND: CTO PCI has been increasingly performed worldwide, but there is a lack of information in this region. METHODS: An international multicenter registry was developed to collect data on CTO PCI performed in centers in Latin America. Patient, angiographic, procedural and outcome data were evaluated. Predictors of unsuccessful procedures were assessed by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: We have included data related to 1,040 CTO PCIs performed in seven countries in Latin America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Puerto Rico). The mean age was 64 ± 10 years, and CTO PCI was performed mainly for angina control (81%) or treatment of a large ischemic area (30%). Overall technical success rate was 82.5%, and it was achieved with antegrade wire escalation in 81%, antegrade dissection/re-entry in 8% and with retrograde techniques in 11% of the successful procedures. Multivariable analysis identified moderate/severe calcification, a blunt proximal cap and a previous attempt as independent predictors of unsuccessful procedures. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) occurred in 3.1% of the cases, death in 1% and cardiac tamponade in 0.9% CONCLUSIONS: CTO PCI in Latin America has been performed mainly for ischemia relief. Procedures were associated with a success rate above 80% and low incidence of MACE. Predictors of unsuccessful procedures were similar to those previously reported in the literature.

Valvotomia mitral percutânea: quarta dilatação / Percutaneous mitral valvotomy: fourth dilatation

Paciente do sexo feminino, 37 anos, portadora de estenose mitral de etiologia reumática, submetida, com sucesso, a valvotomia mitral percutânea em 1996, 2000 e 2005. Após 41 meses do terceiro procedimento, além de episódios de fibrilação atrial paroxística, voltou a apresentar dispneia aos moderados esforços. O estudo ecocardiográfico demonstrou gradiente transvalvar médio de 8 mmHg, pressão sistólica da artéria pulmonar de 55 mmHg, área valvar mitral de 1 cm² e escore de Wilkins de 10 pontos. Em decorrência da evidência de reestenose clínica e ecocardiográfica, indicou-se novo procedimento percutâneo, realizado sem intercorrências, porém obtendo-se resultado subótimo.

Thirty-seven-year-old female, previously diagnosed with mitral valve stenosis due to rheumatic fever, who had successfully undergone percutaneous mitral valvotomy in 1996, 2000 and 2005. Forty-one months after the thirdprocedure, in addition to episodes of paroxystic atrial fibrillation, the patient had dyspnea after ordinary exertion.Echocardiographic evaluation revealed a mean transvalvular gradient of 8 mmHg, pulmonary artery systolic pressure of 55 mmHg, a mitral valve area of 1 cm², and a Wilkins score of 10 points. With the evidence of clinical and echocardiographicmitral restenosis, a new percutaneous procedure was performed, with no periprocedural complications, however, achieving suboptimal outcome.