Elevated Troponins after COVID-19 Hospitalization and Long-Term COVID-19 Symptoms: Incidence, Prognosis, and Clinical Outcomes-Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE-2).

Background: Acute cardiac injury (ACI) after COVID-19 has been linked with unfavorable clinical outcomes, but data on the clinical impact of elevated cardiac troponin on discharge during follow-up are scarce. Our objective is to elucidate the clinical outcome of patients with elevated troponin on discharge after surviving a COVID-19 hospitalization. Methods: We conducted an analysis in the prospective registry HOPE-2 (NCT04778020). Only patients discharged alive were selected for analysis, and all-cause death on follow-up was considered as the primary endpoint. As a secondary endpoint, we established any long-term COVID-19 symptoms. HOPE-2 stopped enrolling patients on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, of which 1805 were deceased during the acute phase. Finally, 2382 patients alive on discharge underwent propensity score matching by relevant baseline variables in a 1:3 fashion, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Results: Patients with elevated troponin experienced significantly higher all-cause death during follow-up (log-rank = 27.23, p < 0.001), and had a higher chance of experiencing long-term COVID-19 cardiovascular symptoms. Specifically, fatigue and dyspnea (57.7% and 62.8%, with p-values of 0.009 and <0.001, respectively) are among the most common. Conclusions: After surviving the acute phase, patients with elevated troponin on discharge present increased mortality and long-term COVID-19 symptoms over time, which is clinically relevant in follow-up visits.

Impact of the MEESSI-AHF tool to guide disposition decision-making in patients with acute heart failure in the emergency department: a before-and-after study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of risk stratification using the MEESSI-AHF (Multiple Estimation of risk based on the Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with acute heart failure) scale to guide disposition decision-making on the outcomes of ED patients with acute heart failure (AHF), and assess the adherence of emergency physicians to risk stratification recommendations. METHODS: This was a prospective quasi-experimental study (before/after design) conducted in eight Spanish EDs which consecutively enrolled adult patients with AHF. In the pre-implementation stage, the admit/discharge decision was performed entirely based on emergency physician judgement. During the post-implementation phase, emergency physicians were advised to 'discharge' patients classified by the MEESSI-AHF scale as low risk and 'admit' patients classified as increased risk. Nonetheless, the final decision was left to treating emergency physicians. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were days alive and out of hospital, in-hospital mortality and 30-day post-discharge combined adverse event (ED revisit, hospitalisation or death). RESULTS: The pre-implementation and post-implementation cohorts included 1589 and 1575 patients, respectively (median age 85 years, 56% females) with similar characteristics, and 30-day all-cause mortality was 9.4% and 9.7%, respectively (post-implementation HR=1.03, 95% CI=0.82 to 1.29). There were no differences in secondary outcomes or in the percentage of patients entirely managed in the ED without hospitalisation (direct discharge from the ED, 23.5% vs 24.4%, OR=1.05, 95% CI=0.89 to 1.24). Adjusted models did not change these results. Emergency physicians followed the MEESSI-AHF-based recommendation on patient disposition in 70.9% of cases (recommendation over-ruling: 29.1%). Physicians were more likely to over-rule the recommendation when 'discharge' was recommended (56.4%; main reason: need for hospitalisation for a second diagnosis) than when 'admit' was recommended (12.8%; main reason: no appreciation of severity of AHF decompensation by emergency physician), with an OR for over-ruling the 'discharge' compared with the 'admit' recommendation of 8.78 (95% CI=6.84 to 11.3). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the MEESSI-AHF risk stratification tool in the ED to guide disposition decision-making did not improve patient outcomes.

Re-sleeve gastrectomy is a safe and sensible intervention in selected patients: retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy is a good treatment intervention to control the metabolic syndrome in patients with obesity worldwide. However, weight regain is of great concern and would usually necessitate a reintervention. In recent years, re-sleeve gastrectomy (ReSG) has been proposed to treat weight regain in the context of a large residual stomach. Our objective was to analyze the long-term results and safety profile of this intervention in a large case series. METHODS: From September 2010 to March 2021, a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary nonuniversity hospital was performed. Seventy-nine patients received a ReSG by laparoscopy. Preoperative radiologic imaging showed a dilation of the gastric pouch exceeding 250 cc in all cases. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients (87% females) with a mean age of 44.8 years old and a mean BMI of 40.0 kg/m 2 were enrolled in the study. The mean follow-up was 44.8 months. The ReSG indication was insufficient weight loss in 37 patients (46.8%) and weight regain in 39 patients (53.2%). The authors noticed a 10.1% complications rate: gastric stenosis (5.1%), bleeding (2.5%), and incisional site hernia in 2.5%, with no death. There was no gastric fistula detected. The mean BMI decreased to 33.1 kg/m 2 after ReSG (a decrease of 6.9 kg/m 2 ). CONCLUSION: After insufficient weight loss or weight regain following sleeve gastrectomy and in the presence of localized or global gastric tube dilation, ReSG seems to be a good treatment choice and a safe procedure.

Decisions to admit vs. discharge patients with acute heart failure from the emergency department: consistency with a measure of severity of decompensation and the impact on prognosis. / Decisión de hospitalización o alta en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca aguda en urgencias, su adecuación con la gravedad de la descompensación e impacto pronóstico.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the consistency between decisions to discharge or admit patients with acute heart failure (AHF) treated in emergency departments (EDs) and the level of risk of adverse events, and to analyze the impact of decisions to discharge patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective study of baseline clinical data collected from patients diagnosed with AHF in 16 Spanish emergency departments. Patients were stratified by severity of decompensated AHF based on MEESSI assessment (Multiple Estimation of Risk Based on the Spanish Emergency Department Score). The distribution of severity was described for patients who were hospitalized (overall and for departments receiving the largest number of admissions) and for discharged patients. We analyzed the data for discharged patients for associations with the following quality-of-care indicators: all-cause mortality of less than 2% at 30 days, revisits to the ED for AHF in less than 10% of patients within 7 days of discharge, and revisits to the ED or admission for AHF in less than 20% within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: We included 2855 patients with a median (interquartile range) age of 84 (76-88) years. Fifty-four percent were women, 1042 (36.5%) were classified as low risk, 1239 (43.4%) as intermediate risk, 301 (10.5%) as high risk, and 273 (9.6%) as very high risk. Thirty-day mortality rates by level of low to very high risk were 1.9%, 9.3%, 15.3%, and 38.4%, respectively. One-year mortality rates by risk level were 15.4%, 35.6%, 52.0%, and 74.2%. Admission rates by risk level were 62.2%, 77.4%, 87.0%, and 88.3%. Overall, 47.1% o patients discharged from the ED were in the 3 higher-risk categories (intermediate to very high), and 30.7% were in the lowest risk category. The 5 hospital areas receiving the most admissions, in order of lowest-to-highest risk classification, were internal medicine, the short-stay unit, cardiology, intensive care, and geriatrics. Rates and 95% CIs for quality-of-care indicators in patients discharged from EDs were as follows: 30-day mortality, 4.3% (3.0%-6.1%); ED revisits within 7 days, 11.4% (9.2%-14.0%), and ED revisits or admissions within 30 days, 31.5% (28.0%-35.1%). In patients classified as low risk on ED discharge, these percentages were lower, as follows, respectively: 0.5% (0.1%-1.8%), 10.5% (7.6%-14.0%), and 29.5% (26.6%-32.6%). CONCLUSION: We detected disparity between severity of AHF decompensation and the decision to discharge or admit patients. Outcomes in patients discharged from EDs do not reach the recommended quality-of-care standards. Reducing inconsistencies between severity of decompensation and ED decisions could help to improve quality targets.

OBJETIVO: Analizar cómo se ajusta la decisión de ingreso o alta del paciente con insuficiencia cardiaca aguda (ICA) atendido en urgencias a su riesgo de evento adverso, así como su impacto en el pronóstico en aquellos dados de alta desde urgencias. METODO: Se recogieron datos basales y clínicos de pacientes diagnosticados de ICA en 16 servicios de urgencias españoles. Los pacientes se estratificaron según la gravedad de la descompensación mediante la escala MEESSI y se analizó la distribución de dicha gravedad en hospitalizados (en conjunto, e individualmente para los servicios con mayor número de hospitalizaciones) y dados de alta desde urgencias. En este último grupo, se analizó el cumplimiento de los siguientes indicadores de calidad: mortalidad por cualquier causa a 30 días ( 2%), reconsulta a urgencias por ICA a 7 días posalta ( 10%), y reconsulta a urgencias u hospitalización por ICA a 30 días posalta ( 20%). RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 2.855 pacientes (edad mediana = 84 años, RIC = 76-88; mujeres = 54%): 1.042 pacientes (36,5%) de riesgo bajo, 1.239 (43,4%) intermedio, 301 (10,5%) alto y 273 (9,6%) muy alto. La mortalidad a 30 días por categorías de riesgo fue 1,9%, 9,3%, 15,3% y 38,4%, respectivamente; la mortalidad al año 15,4%, 35,6%, 52,0% y 74,2%; y la hospitalización 62,2%, 77,4%, 87,0% y 88,3%. El 47,1% de pacientes dados de alta de urgencias tenía un riesgo incrementado (intermedio, alto o muy alto) y el 30,7% de hospitalizados eran de bajo riesgo. La gravedad de la descompensación según el servicio de hospitalización se incrementaba en el siguiente orden: medicina interna, corta estancia, cardiología, intensivos y geriatría. El 4,3% de pacientes dados de alta de urgencias (IC 95%: 3,0-6,1) falleció a los 30 días, el 11,4% (9,2-14,0) reconsultó en urgencias a los 7 días, y el 31,5% (28,0-35,1) reconsultó en urgencias o se hospitalizó a los 30 días. Si sólo se consideran los pacientes dados de alta de bajo riesgo, estos porcentajes descienden al 0,5% (0,1-1,8), 10,5% (7,6-14,0) y 29,5% (26,6-32,6), respectivamente. CONCLUSIONES: Existe disparidad entre la gravedad de la descompensación y la decisión en urgencias de hospitalizar o dar de alta a los pacientes con ICA. Los resultados que se obtienen en los pacientes dados de alta desde urgencias no alcanzan los estándares de calidad recomendados. Disminuir las incongruencias entre gravedad de la descompensación y toma de decisión podría contribuir a cumplir con estos estándares.

Clinical Profile and Determinants of Mortality in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease Admitted for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome and diabetes mellitus: a propensity-matched analysis of the International HOPE-II COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a higher rate of severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, data about post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) in patients with DM are limited. Methods: This multicenter, propensity score-matched study compared long-term follow-up data about cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other symptoms in 8,719 patients with DM to those without DM. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) according to age and sex resulted in 1,548 matched pairs. Results: Diabetics and nondiabetics had a mean age of 72.6 ± 12.7 years old. At follow-up, cardiovascular symptoms such as dyspnea and increased resting heart rate occurred less in patients with DM (13.2% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.01) than those without DM (2.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.05), respectively. The incidence of newly diagnosed arterial hypertension was slightly lower in DM patients as compared to non-DM patients (0.5% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.18). Abnormal spirometry was observed more in patients with DM than those without DM (18.8% vs. 13; p = 0.24). Paranoia was diagnosed more frequently in patients with DM than in non-DM patients at follow-up time (4% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.009). The incidence of newly diagnosed renal insufficiency was higher in patients suffering from DM as compared to patients without DM (4.8% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.09). The rate of readmission was comparable in patients with and without DM (19.7% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.61). The reinfection rate with COVID-19 was comparable in both groups (2.9% in diabetics vs. 2.3% in nondiabetics; p = 0.55). Long-term mortality was higher in DM patients than in non-DM patients (33.9% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The mortality rate was higher in patients with DM type II as compared to those without DM. Readmission and reinfection rates with COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. The incidence of cardiovascular symptoms was higher in patients without DM.

Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Heart Disease: Incidence, Prognostic Factors, Outcomes and Vaccination: Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE 2).

BACKGROUND: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81-3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.

Emergency department observation of patients with acute heart failure prior to hospital admission: impact on short-term prognosis. / Observación en urgencias previa a la hospitalización en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca aguda: impacto sobre el pronóstico a corto plazo.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze whether short-term outcomes are affected when patients diagnosed with acute heart failure (AHF) spend time in an emergency department observation unit (EDOU) before hospital admission. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Baseline and emergency episode data were collected for patients diagnosed with AHF in the EDs of 15 Spanish hospitals. We analyzed crude and adjusted associations between EDOU stay and 30-day mortality (primary outcome) and in-hospital mortality and a prolonged hospital stay of more than 7 days (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: A total of 6597 patients with a median (interquartile range) age of 83 (76-88 years) were studied. Fifty-five percent were women. All were hospitalized for AHF (50% in internal medicine wards, 23% in cardiology, 11% in geriatrics, and 16 in other specialties. Of these patients, 3241 (49%) had had EDOU stays and 3350 (51%) had been admitted immediately, with no EDOU stay. Having an EDOU stay was associated with female sex, dementia or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, long-term treatment with certain drugs for heart failure, greater baseline deterioration in function, and a higher degree of decompensation. Patients in the EDOU group were more often admitted to an internal medicine ward and had shorter stays; cardiology, geriatric, and intensive care admissions were less likely to have had an EDOU stay. Overall, 30-day mortality was 12.6% (13.7% in the EDOU group and 11.4% in the no-EDOU group; P = .004). In-hospital mortality was 10.4% overall (EDOU, 11.1% and no-EDOU, 9.6%; P = .044). Prolonged hospitalization occurred in 50.0% (EDOU, 48.7% and no-EDOU, 51.2%; P = .046). After adjusting for between-group differences, the EDOU stay was not associated with 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.31). Odds ratios for associations between EDOU stay and in-hospital mortality and prolonged hospital stay, respectively, were 1.09 (95% CI, 0.92-1.29) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.01). CONCLUSION: Although mortality higher in patients hospitalized for AHF who spend time in an EDO, the association seems to be accounted for by their worse baseline situation and the greater seriousness of the decompensation episode, not by time spent in the EDOU.

OBJETIVO: Analizar si la estancia en el área de observación de urgencias (AOU) de pacientes que han sido diagnosticados de insuficiencia cardiaca aguda (ICA) y que deben ingresar está asociada con algún cambio en la evolución a corto plazo. METODO: Se recogieron datos basales y clínicos de pacientes diagnosticados de ICA en el servicio de urgencias de 15 hospitales españoles. Se analizó la asociación cruda y ajustada de la estancia en el AOU previa a la hospitalización con mortalidad a 30 días (objetivo primario) y con mortalidad intrahospitalaria e ingreso prolongado (> 7 días) (objetivos secundarios). RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 6.597 pacientes (mediana = 83 años, RIC = 76-88; mujeres = 55%) hospitalizados por ICA (50% en medicina interna, 23% en cardiología, 11% en geriatría y 16% en otros servicios); de ellos, 3.241 (49%) permanecieron en observación en urgencias (grupo AOU) y 3.350 (51%) hospitalizaron sin observación previa (grupo no-AOU). La observación en urgencias se asoció con ser mujer, tener demencia o enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica, recibir crónicamente fármacos específicos para insuficiencia cardiaca, mayor deterioro funcional basal y mayor gravedad de la descompensación. El grupo AOU más frecuentemente hospitalizó en medicina interna y corta estancia, y menos frecuentemente en cardiología, geriatría y cuidados intensivos. La mortalidad a 30 días fue del 12,6% (AOU = 13,7%, no-AOU = 11,4%, p = 0,004); la mortalidad intrahospitalaria fue del 10,4% (AOU = 11,1%, no-AOU = 9,6%, p = 0,044) y el ingreso prolongado del 50,0% (AOU = 48,7%, no-AOU = 51,2%, p = 0,046). Tras ajustar por las diferencias entre grupos, la estancia en observación en urgencias no se asoció con mortalidad a 30 días (HR = 1,14, IC 95% = 0,99-1,31), mortalidad intrahospitalaria (OR = 1,09, IC 95% = 0,92-1,29) o estancia prolongada (OR = 0,91, IC 95% = 0,82-1,01). CONCLUSIONES: Aunque los pacientes hospitalizados por ICA que permanecen en observación en urgencias presentan mayor mortalidad, esta asociación parece explicarse por su peor situación de base y la mayor gravedad del episodio de descompensación y no por su paso por el AOU.

Impacts of postpartum length at the initiation of the fixed-time artificial insemination protocol on pregnancy rates of Bos indicus beef cows.

The shortest interval between calving and initiation of fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI) protocols recommended in Brazilian cow-calf systems is 30 d, based on research that characterized uterine involution and incidence of uterine disorders in Bos taurus females. Prevalence of uterine disorders such as subclinical endometritis is limited in Nelore (B. indicus) cows as early as 28 d after calving. We hypothesized that Nelore cows can receive an FTAI protocol as early as 20 d postpartum (DPP) and still experience satisfactory reproductive results. This study evaluated pregnancy rates in 5,258 Nelore cows (n = 1,703 primiparous and 3,555 multiparous) according to DPP at the initiation of the FTAI protocol. Cow body condition score (BCS) was recorded at FTAI, and pregnancy diagnosis was performed ~30 d after FTAI. Cows were ranked within parity by DPP at the initiation of the FTAI protocol and classified according to 5-d intervals (e.g., ≤15 DPP, 16 to 20 DPP, 21 to 26 DPP, until cows with ≥76 DPP). Data were analyzed within parity, using cow as experimental unit and orthogonal polynomial contrasts (linear, quadratic, or cubic) generated using the mean DPP of each DPP class. In both parities, cow BCS at FTAI decreased linearly (P ≤ 0.01) with the advance of DPP (e.g., 4.79, 4.00, and 3.73 in primiparous, and 4.95, 3.70, and 3.23 in multiparous cows classified as ≤15 DPP, 36 to 40 DPP, ≥76 DPP, respectively). The pregnancy rate to FTAI was affected quadratically (P < 0.01) by DPP for both parities. In primiparous cows, the pregnancy rate increased until 36 to 40 DPP (60%), remained near this level until 51 to 60 DPP, and then decreased with the advance of DPP, whereas cows classified as 21 to 25 DPP expressed satisfactory results (41.5%). In multiparous cows, the pregnancy rate increased until 46 to 50 DPP (70.8%), remained near this level until 56 to 60 DPP, and then decreased with the advance of DPP, whereas cows classified as 21 to 25 DPP also expressed satisfactory results (63.6%). Collectively, primiparous and multiparous Nelore cows evaluated herein experienced optimal pregnancy rates when the FTAI protocol was initiated within 30 to 60 DPP, although reasonable outcomes were observed when the FTAI protocol was initiated as early as 21 DPP. Hence, the interval between calving and initiation of the FTAI protocol can be shortened by 10 d in Nelore females and still yield acceptable pregnancy rates, which can be of great value to cows that calve immediately prior to or during the annual breeding season.

Evaluation of the HEFESTOS scale to predict outcomes in emergency department acute heart failure patients.

The HEFESTOS scale was developed in 14 Spanish primary care centres and validated in 9 primary care centres of other European countries. It showed good performance to predict death/hospitalisation during the first 30 days after an episode of acute heart failure (AHF), with c-statistics of 0.807/0.730 in the derivation/validation cohorts. We evaluated this scale in the emergency department (ED) setting, comparing it to the EHMRG and MEESSI scales in the ED and the EFFECT and GWTG scales in hospitalised patients, to predict 30-day outcomes, including death and hospitalisation. Consecutive AHF patients were enrolled in 34 Spanish EDs in January-February 2016, 2018, and 2019 with variables needed to calculate outcome scores. Thirty-day hospitalisation/death (together and separately) and post-discharge combined adverse event (ED revisit or hospitalisation for AHF or all-cause death) were determined for patients discharged home after ED care. Predictive capacity was assessed by c-statistic with 95% confidence intervals. Of 10,869 patients, 4,044 were included (median age: 83 years, 54% women). The performance of HEFESTOS was modest for 30-day hospitalisation/death, c-statistic=0.656 (0.637-0.675), hospitalisation, 0.650 (0.631-0.669), and death, 0.610 (0.576-0.644). Of 1,034 patients with scores for the 5 scales, HEFESTOS had the numerically highest c-statistic for hospitalisation/death at 30 days, 0.666 (0.627-0.704), vs. MEESSI= 0.650 (0.612-0.687, p=0.51), EFFECT=0.633 (0.595-0.672, p=0.21), GWTG=0.618 (0.578-0.657, p=0.06) and EHMRG=0.617 (0.577-0.704, p=0.07). Similar modest performances were observed for predicting hospitalisation [ranging from HEFESTOS=0.656 (0.618-0.695) to GWTG=0.603 (0.564-0.643)]. Conversely, prediction of 30-day death was good with the MEESSI=0.787 (0.728-845), EFFECT=0.754 (0.691-0.818) and GWTG=0.749 (0.689-0.809) scales, and modest with EHMRG=0.649 (0.581-0.717) and HEFESTOS=0.610 (0.538-0.683). Although the HEFESTOS scale was numerically better for predicting 30-day hospitalisation/death in ED AHF patients, its modest performance precludes routine use. Only 30-day mortality was adequately predicted by some scales, with the MEESSI achieving the best results.

Aspirin Therapy on Prophylactic Anticoagulation for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis of the HOPE-COVID-19 Registry.

Background COVID-19 is an infectious illness, featured by an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, no standard antithrombotic therapy is currently recommended for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of additional therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. Methods and Results A total of 8168 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. Study population included patients treated with PAC or with PAC and aspirin. A comparison of clinical outcomes between patients treated with PAC versus PAC and aspirin was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score matching. Of 7824 patients with complete data, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with PAC and aspirin versus PAC (15% versus 21%, Log Rank P=0.01). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of patients with COVID-19, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure, and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; [95% CI 0.42-0.92], P=0.018). Conclusions Combination PAC and aspirin was associated with lower mortality risk among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a propensity score matched population compared to PAC alone.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Treatment outcomes 24 months after initiating short, all-oral bedaquiline-containing or injectable-containing rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis treatment regimens in South Africa: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for short and safe all-oral treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. We compared outcomes up to 24 months after treatment initiation for patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis in South Africa treated with a short, all-oral bedaquiline-containing regimen (bedaquiline group), or a short, injectable-containing regimen (injectable group). METHODS: Patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis, aged 18 years or older, eligible for a short regimen starting treatment between Jan 1 and Dec 31, 2017, with a bedaquiline-containing or WHO recommended injectable-containing treatment regimen of 9-12 months, registered in the drug-resistant tuberculosis database (EDRWeb), and with known age, sex, HIV status, and national identification number were eligible for study inclusion; patients receiving linezolid, carbapenems, terizidone or cycloserine, delamanid, or para-aminosalicylic acid were excluded. Bedaquiline was given at a dose of 400 mg once daily for two weeks followed by 200 mg three times a week for 22 weeks. To compare regimens, patients were exactly matched on HIV and ART status, previous tuberculosis treatment history, and baseline acid-fast bacilli smear and culture result, while propensity score matched on age, sex, province of treatment, and isoniazid-susceptibility status. We did binomial linear regression to estimate adjusted risk differences (aRD) and 95% CIs for 24-month outcomes, which included: treatment success (ie, cure or treatment completion without evidence of recurrence) versus all other outcomes, survival versus death, disease free survival versus survival with treatment failure or recurrence, and loss to follow-up versus all other outcomes. FINDINGS: Overall, 1387 (14%) of 10152 patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis treated during 2017 met inclusion criteria; 688 in the bedaquiline group and 699 in the injectable group. Four patients (1%) had treatment failure or recurrence, 44 (6%) were lost to follow-up, and 162 (24%) died in the bedaquiline group, compared with 17 (2%), 87 (12%), and 199 (28%), respectively, in the injectable group. In adjusted analyses, treatment success was 14% (95% CI 8-20) higher in the bedaquiline group than in the injectable group (70% vs 57%); loss to follow-up was 4% (1-8) lower in the bedaquiline group (6% vs 12%); and disease-free survival was 2% (0-5) higher in the bedaquiline group (99% vs 97%). The bedaquiline group had 8% (4-11) lower risk of mortality during treatment (17·0% vs 22·4%), but there was no difference in mortality post-treatment. INTERPRETATION: Patients in the bedaquiline group experienced significantly higher rates of treatment success at 24 months. This finding supports the use of short bedaquiline-containing regimens in eligible patients. FUNDING: WHO Global TB Programme. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

[Management and impact of interventions to reduce COVID-19 cases in Costa RicaGestão e impacto das medidas de intervenção para reduzir os casos de COVID-19 na Costa Rica]. / Gestión e impacto de las medidas de intervención para la reducción de casos por COVID-19 en Costa Rica.

Objective: Assess the impact of interventions introduced in Costa Rica during 2020 and 2021 to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A Bayesian Poisson regression model was used, incorporating control or intervention measures as independent variables in the changes in reported case numbers per epidemiological week. Results: The results showed the relative and combined impact of containment policies and measures on the reduction of cases: mainly vehicular traffic restrictions, use of masks, and implementation of health guidelines and protocols. Evidence of impact was optimized and made available for decision-making by the country's health and emergency authorities. Several iterations were generated for constant monitoring of variations in impact at four different moments in the pandemic's spread. Conclusion: The simultaneous implementation of different mitigation measures in Costa Rica has been a driving force in reducing the number of COVID-19 cases.

Objetivo: Avaliar o impacto das intervenções realizadas na Costa Rica durante 2020 e 2021 para o controle da pandemia de COVID-19. Método: Foi utilizado um modelo Bayesiano de regressão de Poisson que incorporou as medidas de controle ou intervenção como variáveis independentes sobre a variação do número de casos por semana epidemiológica. Resultados: Os resultados evidenciaram o efeito relativo e conjunto que as políticas ou medidas de contenção tiveram na redução de casos, principalmente as restrições a veículos, o uso de máscaras e a implementação de diretrizes e protocolos de saúde. As evidências dos efeitos foram otimizadas e disponibilizadas às autoridades sanitárias e de emergência do país para auxiliar na tomada de decisão. Diversas iterações foram geradas para o monitoramento constante da variação nos efeitos em quatro momentos distintos do avanço da pandemia. Conclusão: A aplicação simultânea de diferentes medidas de mitigação na Costa Rica tem sido um agente promotor da diminuição de casos de COVID-19.

Gestión e impacto de las medidas de intervención para la reducción de casos por COVID-19 en Costa Rica

[RESUMEN]. Objetivo. Evaluar el impacto de las intervenciones introducidas en Costa Rica durante 2020 y 2021 para el control de la pandemia por COVID-19. Método. Se empleó un modelo bayesiano de regresión de Poisson que incorporó las medidas de control o intervención como variables independientes sobre la modificación de la cantidad de casos por semana epidemiológica. Resultados. Los resultados evidenciaron el efecto relativo y conjunto que han tenido las políticas o medidas de contención en la reducción de casos, principalmente la restricción vehicular, el uso de mascarillas y la puesta en práctica de los lineamientos y protocolos sanitarios. Las evidencias de los efectos se optimizaron y se pusieron a disposición para la toma de decisiones de las autoridades sanitarias y de emergencia del país. Se generaron varias iteraciones para el monitoreo constante de la variación en los efectos en cuatro momentos distintos del avance de la pandemia. Conclusión. La aplicación simultánea de distintas medidas de mitigación en Costa Rica ha sido un agente promotor de la disminución de casos de COVID-19.

[ABSTRACT]. Objective. Assess the impact of interventions introduced in Costa Rica during 2020 and 2021 to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. A Bayesian Poisson regression model was used, incorporating control or intervention measures as independent variables in the changes in reported case numbers per epidemiological week. Results. The results showed the relative and combined impact of containment policies and measures on the reduction of cases: mainly vehicular traffic restrictions, use of masks, and implementation of health guidelines and protocols. Evidence of impact was optimized and made available for decision-making by the country’s health and emergency authorities. Several iterations were generated for constant monitoring of variations in impact at four different moments in the pandemic’s spread. Conclusion. The simultaneous implementation of different mitigation measures in Costa Rica has been a driving force in reducing the number of COVID-19 cases.

[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Avaliar o impacto das intervenções realizadas na Costa Rica durante 2020 e 2021 para o controle da pandemia de COVID-19. Método. Foi utilizado um modelo Bayesiano de regressão de Poisson que incorporou as medidas de controle ou intervenção como variáveis independentes sobre a variação do número de casos por semana epidemiológica. Resultados. Os resultados evidenciaram o efeito relativo e conjunto que as políticas ou medidas de contenção tiveram na redução de casos, principalmente as restrições a veículos, o uso de máscaras e a implementação de diretrizes e protocolos de saúde. As evidências dos efeitos foram otimizadas e disponibilizadas às autoridades sanitárias e de emergência do país para auxiliar na tomada de decisão. Diversas iterações foram geradas para o monitoramento constante da variação nos efeitos em quatro momentos distintos do avanço da pandemia. Conclusão. A aplicação simultânea de diferentes medidas de mitigação na Costa Rica tem sido um agente promotor da diminuição de casos de COVID-19.

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.

Predictors of poor prognosis in healthy, young, individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of poor prognosis in previously healthy young individuals admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. All patients without co-morbidities, without usual treatments and ≤65 years old were selected from an international registry (HOPE-COVID-19, NCT04334291). We focused on baseline variables-symptoms and signs at admission-to analyse risk factors for poor prognosis. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse clinical events during hospitalization including mortality, mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, prone, sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and embolic events. RESULTS: Overall, 773 healthy young patients were included. The primary composite end point was observed in 29% (225/773) and the overall mortality rate was 3.6% (28/773). In the combined event group, 75% (168/225) of patients were men and the mean age was 49 (±11) years, whereas in the non-combined event group, the prevalence of male gender was 43% (238/548) and the mean age was 42 (±13) years (p < 0.001 for both). On admission, respiratory insufficiency and cough were described in 51.4% (114/222) and 76% (170/223) of patients, respectively, in the combined event group, versus 7.9% (42/533) and 56% (302/543) of patients in the other group (p < 0.001 for both). The strongest independent predictor for the combined end point was desaturation (Spo2 <92%) (OR 5.40; 95% CI 3.34-8.75; p < 0.001), followed by tachypnoea (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.93-5.21; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 3.01; 95% CI 1.96-4.61; p < 0.001) and pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray at admission (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.18-4.16; p 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Major adverse clinical events were unexpectedly high considering the baseline characteristics of the cohort. Signs of respiratory compromise at admission and male gender, were predictive for poor prognosis among young healthy patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Gestión e impacto de las medidas de intervención para la reducción de casos por COVID-19 en Costa Rica / Management and impact of interventions to reduce COVID-19 cases in Costa Rica / Gestão e impacto das medidas de intervenção para reduzir os casos de COVID-19 na Costa Rica

RESUMEN Objetivo. Evaluar el impacto de las intervenciones introducidas en Costa Rica durante 2020 y 2021 para el control de la pandemia por COVID-19. Método. Se empleó un modelo bayesiano de regresión de Poisson que incorporó las medidas de control o intervención como variables independientes sobre la modificación de la cantidad de casos por semana epidemiológica. Resultados. Los resultados evidenciaron el efecto relativo y conjunto que han tenido las políticas o medidas de contención en la reducción de casos, principalmente la restricción vehicular, el uso de mascarillas y la puesta en práctica de los lineamientos y protocolos sanitarios. Las evidencias de los efectos se optimizaron y se pusieron a disposición para la toma de decisiones de las autoridades sanitarias y de emergencia del país. Se generaron varias iteraciones para el monitoreo constante de la variación en los efectos en cuatro momentos distintos del avance de la pandemia. Conclusión. La aplicación simultánea de distintas medidas de mitigación en Costa Rica ha sido un agente promotor de la disminución de casos de COVID-19.

ABSTRACT Objective. Assess the impact of interventions introduced in Costa Rica during 2020 and 2021 to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. A Bayesian Poisson regression model was used, incorporating control or intervention measures as independent variables in the changes in reported case numbers per epidemiological week. Results. The results showed the relative and combined impact of containment policies and measures on the reduction of cases: mainly vehicular traffic restrictions, use of masks, and implementation of health guidelines and protocols. Evidence of impact was optimized and made available for decision-making by the country's health and emergency authorities. Several iterations were generated for constant monitoring of variations in impact at four different moments in the pandemic's spread. Conclusion. The simultaneous implementation of different mitigation measures in Costa Rica has been a driving force in reducing the number of COVID-19 cases.

RESUMO Objetivo. Avaliar o impacto das intervenções realizadas na Costa Rica durante 2020 e 2021 para o controle da pandemia de COVID-19. Método. Foi utilizado um modelo Bayesiano de regressão de Poisson que incorporou as medidas de controle ou intervenção como variáveis independentes sobre a variação do número de casos por semana epidemiológica. Resultados. Os resultados evidenciaram o efeito relativo e conjunto que as políticas ou medidas de contenção tiveram na redução de casos, principalmente as restrições a veículos, o uso de máscaras e a implementação de diretrizes e protocolos de saúde. As evidências dos efeitos foram otimizadas e disponibilizadas às autoridades sanitárias e de emergência do país para auxiliar na tomada de decisão. Diversas iterações foram geradas para o monitoramento constante da variação nos efeitos em quatro momentos distintos do avanço da pandemia. Conclusão. A aplicação simultânea de diferentes medidas de mitigação na Costa Rica tem sido um agente promotor da diminuição de casos de COVID-19.

Sepsis of Patients Infected by SARS-CoV-2: Real-World Experience From the International HOPE-COVID-19-Registry and Validation of HOPE Sepsis Score.

Background: Patients with sepsis with a concomitant coronavirus (COVID-19) infection are related to a high morbidity and mortality rate. We investigated a large cohort of patients with sepsis with a concomitant COVID-19, and we developed a risk score for the estimation of sepsis risk in COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a sub-analysis from the international Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry for COVID-19 (HOPE-COVID-19-Registry, NCT04334291). Out of 5,837 patients with COVID-19, 624 patients were diagnosed with sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 International Consensus. Results: In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were identified as independent predictors for developing sepsis: current smoking, tachypnoea (>22 breath per minute), hemoptysis, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) <92%, blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP <90 mmHg and diastolic BP <60 mmHg), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15, elevated procalcitonin (PCT), elevated troponin I (TnI), and elevated creatinine >1.5 mg/dl. By assigning odds ratio (OR) weighted points to these variables, the following three risk categories were defined to develop sepsis during admission: low-risk group (probability of sepsis 3.1-11.8%); intermediate-risk group (24.8-53.8%); and high-risk-group (58.3-100%). A score of 1 was assigned to current smoking, tachypnoea, decreased SpO2, decreased BP, decreased GCS, elevated PCT, TnI, and creatinine, whereas a score of 2 was assigned to hemoptysis. Conclusions: The HOPE Sepsis Score including nine parameters is useful in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients to develop sepsis. Sepsis in COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality rate.

Prevalence and 30-Day Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Covid-19 and Prior Lung Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with pre-existing respiratory diseases in the setting of COVID-19 may have a greater risk of severe complications and even death. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, cohort study with 5847 COVID-19 patients admitted to hospitals. Patients were separated in two groups, with/without previous lung disease. Evaluation of factors associated with survival and secondary composite end-point such as ICU admission and respiratory support, were explored. RESULTS: 1,271 patients (22%) had a previous lung disease, mostly COPD. All-cause mortality occurred in 376 patients with lung disease (29.5%) and in 819 patients without (17.9%) (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that patients with lung diseases had a worse 30-day survival (HR = 1.78; 95%C.I. 1.58-2.01; p < 0.001) and COPD had almost 40% mortality. Multivariable Cox regression showed that prior lung disease remained a risk factor for mortality (HR, 1.21; 95%C.I. 1.02-1.44; p = 0.02). Variables independently associated with all-cause mortality risk in patients with lung diseases were oxygen saturation less than 92% on admission (HR, 4.35; 95% CI 3.08-6.15) and elevated D-dimer (HR, 1.84; 95% CI 1.27-2.67). Age younger than 60 years (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.21-0.65) was associated with decreased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Previous lung disease is a risk factor for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Older age, male gender, home oxygen therapy, and respiratory failure on admission were associated with an increased mortality. Efforts must be done to identify respiratory patients to set measures to improve their clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Los pacientes con enfermedades respiratorias preexistentes pueden tener en el contexto de la covid-19 un mayor riesgo de complicaciones graves e incluso de muerte. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohortes multicéntrico y retrospectivo de 5.847 pacientes con covid-19 ingresados en hospitales. Los pacientes se separaron en 2 grupos, sin y con enfermedad pulmonar previa. Se evaluaron factores asociados con la supervivencia y criterios combinados de valoración secundarios, como el ingreso en la UCI y la necesidad de asistencia respiratoria. RESULTADOS: Mil doscientos setenta y un (1.271) pacientes (22%) tenían una enfermedad pulmonar previa, principalmente EPOC. La mortalidad por todas las causas ocurrió en 376 pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar (29,5%) y en 819 pacientes sin enfermedad pulmonar (17,9%; p < 0,001). Las curvas de Kaplan-Meier mostraron que los pacientes con enfermedades pulmonares tenían una peor supervivencia a los 30 días (HR: 1,78; IC del 95%: 1,58-2,01; p < 0,001) y la EPOC tenía una mortalidad de casi el 40%. La regresión de Cox multivariante mostró que la enfermedad pulmonar previa seguía siendo un factor de riesgo de mortalidad (HR: 1,21; IC del 95%: 1,02-1,44; p = 0,02). Las variables asociadas de forma independiente con el riesgo de muerte por todas las causas en pacientes con enfermedades pulmonares fueron la saturación de oxígeno inferior al 92% al ingreso (HR: 4,35; IC del 95%: 3,08-6,15) y el dímero D elevado (HR: 1,84; IC del 95%: 1,27-2,67). La edad menor de 60 años (HR: 0,37; IC del 95%: 0,21-0,65) se asoció con una disminución del riesgo de muerte. CONCLUSIONES: La enfermedad pulmonar previa es un factor de riesgo de muerte en pacientes con covid-19. La edad avanzada, el sexo masculino, la oxigenoterapia domiciliaria y la insuficiencia respiratoria al ingreso se asociaron con un aumento de la mortalidad. Se deben realizar esfuerzos para identificar a los pacientes respiratorios y establecer medidas para mejorar sus resultados clínicos.