Dosing and Administration Strategies of Tocilizumab in Patients With COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab may reduce the risk of death, length of stay, and time of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Limited data are available evaluating low-dose subcutaneous administration of tocilizumab in this setting. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of 2 tocilizumab dosing and administration strategies in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted to compare clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 receiving tocilizumab 400 mg intravenously (400 mg IV) or 162 mg subcutaneously (162 mg SC). Hospitalized patients receiving a single dose of tocilizumab were eligible for inclusion and grouped by dosing and administration strategy. The primary endpoint was ventilator-free days at day 28. Secondary endpoints included length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, mechanical ventilation required after dose, 28-day readmission, 28-day mortality, and change in inflammatory markers. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients were included, with 147 who received tocilizumab 400 mg IV and 156 who received 162 mg SC. There was no significant difference in average ventilator-free days at day 28 in patients receiving 400 mg IV compared with 162 mg SC (26.4 ± 5.3 vs 25.6 ± 6.8 days, respectively; P = 0.812). There was also no difference in LOS (10.4 ± 12.6 vs 10.5 ± 14.0 days; P = 0.637), ICU LOS (3.9 ± 9.0 vs 3.5 ± 8.3 days; P = 0.679), mechanical ventilation after dose (15.6% vs 19.2%; P = 0.412), 28-day readmission (6.1% vs 9.6%; P = 0.268), or 28-day mortality (23.1% vs 25.6%; P = 0.611). Finally, there was no difference regarding change in inflammatory markers at 48 hours (P > 0.05 for all interactions). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this retrospective study involving hospitalized patients with COVID-19, there was no difference between tocilizumab 162 mg SC and 400 mg IV in terms of efficacy. The 162 mg SC dose may be a reasonable alternative to traditional doses.

Myocarditis presentation following COVID-19 virus infection versus COVID-19 vaccination.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine-induced cardiac injury has recently emerged as a major public health concern around the globe. There are reported cases of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis, but they are generally extremely rare and mild. In contrast, COVID-19 infection can cause acute cardiac injury with poor prognosis and high mortality rates. Herein, we describe the difference in patients' presentation by comparing two cases of myocarditis. One after contracting COVID-19 virus infection with a severe clinical course, and the other patient developed myocarditis post-COVID-19 vaccine.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender disparities in acute coronary syndrome patterns.

Background: Global evidence has emerged showing fewer Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) cases than expected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our study aims to evaluate the incidence of ACS before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and analyze differences in gender distribution, and type of presentation. Methods: This is a retrospective study of 997 patients who presented to Huntsville Hospital's catheterization lab for elective and emergency catheterization for ACS and non-ACS during a four-week period from February 26, 2020, to March 10, 2020, and from March 25, 2020, to April 8, 2020, and compared with the equivalent weeks in 2019. Results: We report a 45.5% decrease in ACS cases presenting during the COVID-19 pandemic between March 25, 2020, to April 8, 2020 compared to equivalent weeks in 2019, with a significant drop in percentage of female patients presenting by 30.6%. Upsurge in STEMI cases and a drop in NSTEMI cases was observed during the COVID pandemic compared to 2019. Conclusions: Patients presenting after the onset of the pandemic had elevated cardiac markers, representing higher severity and potentially presenting later in the disease course. The number of total ACS cases and percentage of females presenting to the catheterization lab before the COVID surge (February/March 2019 and 2020) almost remained stable. This comparison data provides validity that the drop in ACS case volume and females in March/April 2020 is more likely due to the pandemic and not due to improvements in overall cardiovascular health metrics. Reasons for this disparity are likely multifaceted and deserve further investigation.

A 20-year single community-based tertiary care center's experience with cardiac myxomas.

We analyzed 54 cases of cardiac myxoma (n = 40) and non-myxoma (n = 14) diagnosed at a single community-based tertiary care center over 20 years. The data were retrospectively collected for patients between the period January 2000 and September 2020 from the hospital database. We described patient characteristics and clinical features of cardiac myxoma. In patients with diagnosis of cardiac myxoma, the median age was 64 years (range 41-78), with 58% females. Cardiac myxoma patients presented in a variety of ways, as dyspnea (42%), palpitations (20%), and chest pain (15%). Transesophageal echocardiogram was performed in 82.5% of patients. Chest computed tomography (CT) was performed in 32.5%, while cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) was performed in 10%. Ischemic evaluation was performed in the majority of patients, primarily having cardiac catheterization. All cardiac myxomas were a single mass and the most common location was the left atrium (n = 34, 85%), followed by the right atrium (n = 6, 15%). 33 (83%) of them were larger than 2 cm. We differentiated cardiac myxoma from non-myxoma mass, which was most commonly a thrombus by histopathology. More patients with cardiac myxoma underwent surgical resection and required hospital and ICU stay than non-myxoma patients. No patients in either group experienced inpatient mortality or a mass recurrence with a median follow-up period of 2 years.

The Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on Hospitalization Outcomes of Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) on hospitalization outcomes of abdominal aortic artery (AAA) endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) at a large-scale sample size representative of the entire United States (U.S.) population. METHODS: We included all adults who were hospitalized in the U.S. for AAA repair with EVAR between 2016 and 2017 using the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision, Clinical procedural diagnosis codes. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, acute kidney injury (AKI), bleeding event, vascular complications, aortic dissection, length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization cost. Hospitalization outcomes were modeled using logistic regression for binary outcomes and Poisson or log-gamma regression for count or right-skewed numeric outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: We included a total of 39,330 records for patients with AAA who underwent EVAR. There were 5.940 patients with AF. On multivariable analysis, EVAR patients with AF had significantly higher odds for mortality with adjusted OR 2.06 (95%CI: 1.09-3.91). They also had significantly higher odds for AKI (A-OR: 1.79 (95%CI: 1.38-2.32), p < 0.001), acute myocardial infarction (A-OR: 2.72 (95%CI: 1.39-5.32), p = 0.004), post procedural bleedings (A-OR: 1.51 (95%CI: 1.20-1.89), p < 0.001), LOS (1.35 (95%CI: 1.24-1.47) p < 0.001) and higher cost (A-OR: 1.06 (9% CI, 1.03-1.09) p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in risk of stroke, vascular complications, and aortic dissection. CONCLUSION: AF is an important independent predictor for mortality and adverse outcomes in patients with AAA undergoing EVAR.

Effects of cardiac toxicity of combination therapy with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in COVID-19 patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which began in China, caused a global pandemic. Few studies have shown the benefit of hydroxychloroquine (HY) ± azithromycin (AZ) for treating COVID-19. Concerns of QT prolongation and increased risks of torsade's de pointes (TdP) with this combination have been raised since each agent can individually prolong the QT interval. This retrospective, observational study included hospitalized patients treated with HY and AZ from March 2020 to May 2020 at a large community hospital. Serial assessments of the QT interval were performed. Our aim is to evaluate the safety and characterize the change in QTc interval and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients treated with HY/AZ. A total of 21 COVID patients who received at least four days of HY and AZ were included in this study. Mean baseline was QTc 403 ms, mean maximum QTc was 440 ms, mean change in QTc was 36 ms. Only one patient (4.8%) developed prolonged QTc > 500 ms. No patient had a change in QTc of 60 ms or more. No patient developed TdP. Fifteen patients (71.4%) had hypoxia on admission, with only two patients (9.5%) required oxygen of 1-2 L at discharge. 80.9% of patients have been discharged home or inpatient rehabilitation.