Randomized trial of effect of bariatric surgery on blood pressure after 5 years

BACKGROUND: Obesity represents a major obstacle for controlling hypertension, the leading risk factor for cardiovascular mortality. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term effects of bariatric surgery on hypertension control and remission. METHODS: We conducted a randomized clinical trial with subjects with obesity grade 1 or 2 plus hypertension using at least 2 medications. We excluded subjects with previous cardiovascular events and poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Subjects were assigned to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) combined with medical therapy (MT) or MT alone. We reassessed the original primary outcome (reduction of at least 30% of the total antihypertensive medications while maintaining blood pressure levels <140/90 mm Hg) at 5 years. The main analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: A total of 100 subjects were included (76% women, age 43.8 ± 9.2 years, body mass index: 36.9 ± 2.7 kg/m2). At 5 years, body mass index was 36.40 kg/m2 (95% CI: 35.28-37.52 kg/m2) for MT and 28.01 kg/m2 (95% CI: 26.95-29.08 kg/m2) for RYGB (P < 0.001). Compared with MT, RYGB promoted a significantly higher rate of number of medications reduction (80.7% vs 13.7%; relative risk: 5.91; 95% CI: 2.58-13.52; P < 0.001) and the mean number of antihypertensive medications was 2.97 (95% CI: 2.33-3.60) for MT and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.51-1.09) for RYGB (P < 0.001). The rates of hypertension remission were 2.4% vs 46.9% (relative risk: 19.66; 95% CI: 2.74-141.09; P < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis considering only completed cases revealed consistent results. Interestingly, the rate of apparent resistant hypertension was lower after RYGB (0% vs 15.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery represents an effective and durable strategy to control hypertension and related polypharmacy in subjects with obesity. (GAstric bypass to Treat obEse Patients With steAdy hYpertension [GATEWAY]; NCT01784848).

Randomized Trial of Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Blood Pressure After 5 Years.

BACKGROUND: Obesity represents a major obstacle for controlling hypertension, the leading risk factor for cardiovascular mortality. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term effects of bariatric surgery on hypertension control and remission. METHODS: We conducted a randomized clinical trial with subjects with obesity grade 1 or 2 plus hypertension using at least 2 medications. We excluded subjects with previous cardiovascular events and poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Subjects were assigned to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) combined with medical therapy (MT) or MT alone. We reassessed the original primary outcome (reduction of at least 30% of the total antihypertensive medications while maintaining blood pressure levels <140/90 mm Hg) at 5 years. The main analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: A total of 100 subjects were included (76% women, age 43.8 ± 9.2 years, body mass index: 36.9 ± 2.7 kg/m2). At 5 years, body mass index was 36.40 kg/m2 (95% CI: 35.28-37.52 kg/m2) for MT and 28.01 kg/m2 (95% CI: 26.95-29.08 kg/m2) for RYGB (P < 0.001). Compared with MT, RYGB promoted a significantly higher rate of number of medications reduction (80.7% vs 13.7%; relative risk: 5.91; 95% CI: 2.58-13.52; P < 0.001) and the mean number of antihypertensive medications was 2.97 (95% CI: 2.33-3.60) for MT and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.51-1.09) for RYGB (P < 0.001). The rates of hypertension remission were 2.4% vs 46.9% (relative risk: 19.66; 95% CI: 2.74-141.09; P < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis considering only completed cases revealed consistent results. Interestingly, the rate of apparent resistant hypertension was lower after RYGB (0% vs 15.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery represents an effective and durable strategy to control hypertension and related polypharmacy in subjects with obesity. (GAstric bypass to Treat obEse Patients With steAdy hYpertension [GATEWAY]; NCT01784848).

Balanced crystalloids versus saline for critically ill patients (BEST-Living): a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of balanced crystalloids compared with that of saline in critically ill patients overall and in specific subgroups is unclear. We aimed to assess whether use of balanced solutions, compared with 0·9% sodium chloride (saline), decreased in-hospital mortality in adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: For this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from inception until March 1, 2022 (updated Sept 1, 2023) for individually randomised and cluster-randomised trials comparing balanced solutions with saline for adult patients in the ICU. Eligible trials were those that allocated patients to receive balanced solutions or saline for fluid resuscitation and maintenance fluids, or for maintenance fluids only; and administered the allocated fluid throughout ICU admission or, for trials using landmark mortality as their primary outcome, until the timepoint at which mortality was assessed (if ≥28 days). Authors of eligible trials were contacted to request individual patient data. Data obtained from eligible trials were merged, checked for accuracy, and centrally analysed by use of Bayesian regression models. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Prespecified subgroups included patients with traumatic brain injury. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022299282). FINDINGS: Our search identified 5219 records, yielding six eligible randomised controlled trials. Data obtained for 34 685 participants from the six trials, 17 407 assigned to receive balanced crystalloids and 17 278 to receive saline, were included in the analysis. The mean age of participants was 58·8 years (SD 17·5). Of 34 653 participants with available data, 14 579 (42·1%) were female and 20 074 (57·9%) were male. Among patients who provided consent to report in-hospital mortality, 2907 (16·8%) of 17 313 assigned balanced solutions and 2975 (17·3%) of 17 166 assigned saline died in hospital (odds ratio [OR] 0·962 [95% CrI 0·909 to 1·019], absolute difference -0·4 percentage points [-1·5 to 0·2]). The posterior probability that balanced solutions reduced mortality was 0·895. In patients with traumatic brain injury, 191 (19·1%) of 999 assigned balanced and 141 (14·7%) of 962 assigned saline died (OR 1·424 [1·100 to 1·818], absolute difference 3·2 percentage points [0·7 to 8·7]). The probability that balanced solutions increased mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury was 0·975. In an independent risk of bias assessment, two trials were deemed to be at low risk of bias and four at high risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: The probability that using balanced solutions in the ICU reduces in-hospital mortality is high, although the certainty of the evidence was moderate and the absolute risk reduction was small. In patients with traumatic brain injury, using balanced solutions was associated with increased in-hospital mortality. FUNDING: HCor (Brazil) and The George Institute for Global Health (Australia).

Multifaceted Strategy Based on Automated Text Messaging After a Recent Heart Failure Admission: The MESSAGE-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Readmissions after an index heart failure (HF) hospitalization are a major contemporary health care problem. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of an intensive telemonitoring strategy in the vulnerable period after an HF hospitalization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted in 30 HF clinics in Brazil. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% and access to mobile phones were enrolled up to 30 days after an HF admission. Data were collected from July 2019 to July 2022. Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to a telemonitoring strategy or standard care. The telemonitoring group received 4 daily short message service text messages to optimize self-care, active engagement, and early intervention. Red flags based on feedback messages triggered automatic diuretic adjustment and/or a telephone call from the health care team. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline to 180 days. A hierarchical win-ratio analysis incorporating blindly adjudicated clinical events (cardiovascular deaths and HF hospitalization) and variation in NT-proBNP was also performed. Results: Of 699 included patients, 460 (65.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 61.2 (14.5) years. A total of 352 patients were randomly assigned to the telemonitoring strategy and 347 to standard care. Satisfaction with the telemonitoring strategy was excellent (net promoting score at 180 days, 78.5). HF self-care increased significantly in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (score difference at 30 days, -2.21; 95% CI, -3.67 to -0.74; P = .001; score difference at 180 days, -2.08; 95% CI, -3.59 to -0.57; P = .004). Variation of NT-proBNP was similar in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (telemonitoring: baseline, 2593 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2314-2923; 180 days, 1313 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1117-1543; standard care: baseline, 2396 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2122-2721; 180 days, 1319 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1114-1564; ratio of change, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77-1.11; P = .39). Hierarchical analysis of the composite outcome demonstrated a similar number of wins in both groups (telemonitoring, 49 883 of 122 144 comparisons [40.8%]; standard care, 48 034 of 122 144 comparisons [39.3%]; win ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.26). Conclusions and Relevance: An intensive telemonitoring strategy applied in the vulnerable period after an HF admission was feasible, well-accepted, and increased scores of HF self-care but did not translate to reductions in NT-proBNP levels nor improvement in a composite hierarchical clinical outcome. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04062461.

Determinants of fluid use and the association between volume of fluid used and effect of balanced solutions on mortality in critically ill patients: a secondary analysis of the BaSICS trial.

PURPOSE: Fluid use could modulate the effect of balanced solutions (BS) on outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It is uncertain whether fluid use practices are driven more by patient features or local practices. It is also unclear whether a "dose-response" for the potential benefits of balanced solutions exists. METHODS: The secondary analysis of the Balanced Solution in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) compared 0.9% saline versus Plasma-Lyte 148® (BS) for fluid therapy in the ICU. The relative contribution of patient features and enrolling site (the random effect) on the volume of fluid used up to day 3 after admission was assessed using different methods, including a Bayesian regression, a frequentist mixed model, and a random forest, all adjusted for relevant patient confounders. Subsequently, a variety of methods were used to assess whether volume of fluid used modulated the effect of BS on 90-day mortality, including a traditional subgroup analysis for patients that remained alive and in the ICU up to 3 days, a Bayesian network accounting for competing risks, and an analysis based on site practices. RESULTS: 10,505 patients were analyzed. Median fluid use in the BS arm and in the 0.9% saline arm were 2500 mL and 2488 mL, respectively. The random effect in the Bayesian regression explained 0.32 (95% credible intervals (CrI) 0.24-0.41) of all model variance (0.33, 95% credible intervals from 0.32-0.35). Frequentist and random forest models produced similar results. In the analysis including only patients alive and in the ICU at 3 days, there was a strong suggestion of interaction between fluid use and the effect of BS, driven mostly by a lower mortality with BS compared to 0.9% saline as fluid use increased for patients with sepsis. These results were consistent in the Bayesian network analysis and in an analysis based on site practices, where septic patients enrolled to BS at high fluid use sites had a lower mortality (absolute risk reduction of - 0.13 [95% credible interval - 0.27 to - 0.01]; 0.98 probability of benefit). CONCLUSION: Baseline patient characteristics collected in the BaSICS trial explain less of the variance of fluid use during the first 3 days than the enrolling site. Volume of fluid used and the effects of BS appear to interact, mostly in the sepsis subgroup where there was a strong association between fluid use after enrollment and the effect of BS on 90-day mortality.

Cardiovascular Safety of Azithromycin in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Prespecified Pooled Analysis of the COALITION I and COALITION II Randomized Clinical Trials.

The cardiovascular safety from azithromycin in the treatment of several infectious diseases has been challenged. In this prespecified pooled analysis of 2 multicenter randomized clinical trials, we aimed to assess whether the use of azithromycin might lead to corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation or clinically relevant ventricular arrhythmias. In the COALITION COVID Brazil I trial, 667 patients admitted with moderate COVID-19 were randomly allocated to hydroxychloroquine, hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin, or standard of care. In the COALITION COVID Brazil II trial, 447 patients with severe COVID-19 were randomly allocated to hydroxychloroquine alone versus hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin. The principal end point for the present analysis was the composite of death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or ventricular arrhythmias. The addition of azithromycin to hydroxychloroquine did not result in any prolongation of the QTc interval (425.8 ± 3.6 ms vs 427.9 ± 3.9 ms, respectively, mean difference -2.1 ms, 95% confidence interval -12.5 to 8.4 ms, p = 0.70). The combination of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine compared with hydroxychloroquine alone did not result in increased risk of the primary end point (proportion of patients with events at 15 days 17.2% vs 16.0%, respectively, hazard ratio 1.08, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.49, p = 0.65). In conclusion, in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 already receiving standard-of-care management (including hydroxychloroquine), the addition of azithromycin did not result in the prolongation of the QTc interval or increase in cardiovascular adverse events. Because azithromycin is among the most commonly prescribed antimicrobial agents, our results may inform clinical practice. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04322123, NCT04321278.

Multifaceted strategy based on automated text messaging after a recent heart failure admission: the MESSAGE-HF Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE: Readmissions after an index heart failure (HF) hospitalization are a major contemporary health care problem. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of an intensive telemonitoring strategy in the vulnerable period after an HF hospitalization. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial was conducted in 30 HF clinics in Brazil. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% and access to mobile phones were enrolled up to 30 days after an HF admission. Data were collected from July 2019 to July 2022. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to a telemonitoring strategy or standard care. The telemonitoring group received 4 daily short message service text messages to optimize self-care, active engagement, and early intervention. Red flags based on feedback messages triggered automatic diuretic adjustment and/or a telephone call from the health care team. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline to 180 days. A hierarchical win-ratio analysis incorporating blindly adjudicated clinical events (cardiovascular deaths and HF hospitalization) and variation in NT-proBNP was also performed. RESULTS: Of 699 included patients, 460 (65.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 61.2 (14.5) years. A total of 352 patients were randomly assigned to the telemonitoring strategy and 347 to standard care. Satisfaction with the telemonitoring strategy was excellent (net promoting score at 180 days, 78.5). HF self-care increased significantly in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (score difference at 30 days, -2.21; 95% CI, -3.67 to -0.74; P = .001; score difference at 180 days, -2.08; 95% CI, -3.59 to -0.57; P = .004). Variation of NT-proBNP was similar in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (telemonitoring: baseline, 2593 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2314-2923; 180 days, 1313 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1117-1543; standard care: baseline, 2396 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2122-2721; 180 days, 1319 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1114-1564; ratio of change, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77-1.11; P = .39). Hierarchical analysis of the composite outcome demonstrated a similar number of wins in both groups (telemonitoring, 49 883 of 122 144 comparisons [40.8%]; standard care, 48 034 of 122 144 comparisons [39.3%]; win ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.26). CONCLUSIONS and relevance: An intensive telemonitoring strategy applied in the vulnerable period after an HF admission was feasible, well-accepted, and increased scores of HF self-care but did not translate to reductions in NT-proBNP levels nor improvement in a composite hierarchical clinical outcome.

Shorter History of Hypertension as a Predictor of Hypertension Remission after 3-years of Bariatric Surgery: Data from the GATEWAY Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence explored predictors of hypertension (HTN) remission after bariatric but data are limited to observational studies and lack of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). This study was aimed to evaluate the rate of HTN remission after bariatric surgery using ABPM and to define predictors of mid-term HTN remission. METHODS: We included patients enrolled in the surgical arm of the GATEWAY randomized trial. HTN remission was defined as controlled blood pressure (< 130 × 80 mmHg) evaluated by 24-h ABPM while no need of anti-hypertensive medications after 36 months. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to assess the predictors of HTN remission after 36 months. RESULTS: 46 patients submitted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). HTN remission occurred in 39% (n = 14 out of 36 patients with complete data at 36 months). Patients with HTN remission had shorter HTN history than no remission group (5.9 ± 5.5 vs. 12.5 ± 8.1 years; p = 0.01). The baseline insulin levels were lower in patients who presented HTN remission, although not statistically significant (OR: 0.90; CI 95%: 0.80-0.99; p = 0.07). In the multivariate analysis, the HTN history (years) was the only independent predictor of HTN remission (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.70-0.97; p = 0.04). Therefore, for each additional year of HTN history, the chance of HTN remission decreases by approximately 15% after RYGB. CONCLUSION: After 3 years of RYGB, HTN remission defined by ABPM was common and independently associated with a shorter HTN history. These data underscore the need of early effective approach of obesity aiming greater impact in its comorbidities.

Rivaroxaban to prevent major clinical outcomes in non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19: the CARE - COALITION VIII randomised clinical trial.

Background: COVID-19 progression is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. Randomised trials have demonstrated that anticoagulants reduce the risk of thromboembolism in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but a benefit of routine anticoagulation has not been demonstrated in the outpatient setting. Methods: We conducted a randomised, open-label, controlled, multicentre study, evaluating the use of rivaroxaban in mild or moderate COVID-19 patients. Adults ≥18 years old, with probable or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, presenting within ≤7 days from symptom onset with no clear indication for hospitalization, plus at least 2 risk factors for complication, were randomised 1:1 either to rivaroxaban 10 mg OD for 14 days or to routine care. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of venous thromboembolic events, need of mechanical ventilation, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or death due to COVID-19 during the first 30 days. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04757857. Findings: Enrollment was prematurely stopped due to sustained reduction in new COVID-19 cases. From September 29th, 2020, through May 23rd, 2022, 660 patients were randomised (median age 61 [Q1-Q3 47-69], 55.7% women). There was no significant difference between rivaroxaban and control in the primary efficacy endpoint (4.3% [14/327] vs 5.8% [19/330], RR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.38-1.46). There was no major bleeding in the control group and 1 in the rivaroxaban group. Interpretation: On light of these findings no decision can be made about the utility of rivaroxaban to improve outcomes in outpatients with COVID-19. Metanalyses data provide no evidence of a benefit of anticoagulant prophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19. These findings were the result of an underpowered study, therefore should be interpreted with caution. Funding: COALITION COVID-19 Brazil and Bayer S.A.

Attributable mortality due to nosocomial sepsis in Brazilian hospitals: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Nosocomial sepsis is a major healthcare issue, but there are few data on estimates of its attributable mortality. We aimed to estimate attributable mortality fraction (AF) due to nosocomial sepsis. METHODS: Matched 1:1 case-control study in 37 hospitals in Brazil. Hospitalized patients in participating hospitals were included. Cases were hospital non-survivors and controls were hospital survivors, which were matched by admission type and date of discharge. Exposure was defined as occurrence of nosocomial sepsis, defined as antibiotic prescription plus presence of organ dysfunction attributed to sepsis without an alternative reason for organ failure; alternative definitions were explored. Main outcome measurement was nosocomial sepsis-attributable fractions, estimated using inversed-weight probabilities methods using generalized mixed model considering time-dependency of sepsis occurrence. RESULTS: 3588 patients from 37 hospitals were included. Mean age was 63 years and 48.8% were female at birth. 470 sepsis episodes occurred in 388 patients (311 in cases and 77 in control group), with pneumonia being the most common source of infection (44.3%). Average AF for sepsis mortality was 0.076 (95% CI 0.068-0.084) for medical admissions; 0.043 (95% CI 0.032-0.055) for elective surgical admissions; and 0.036 (95% CI 0.017-0.055) for emergency surgeries. In a time-dependent analysis, AF for sepsis rose linearly for medical admissions, reaching close to 0.12 on day 28; AF plateaued earlier for other admission types (0.04 for elective surgery and 0.07 for urgent surgery). Alternative sepsis definitions yield different estimates. CONCLUSION: The impact of nosocomial sepsis on outcome is more pronounced in medical admissions and tends to increase over time. The results, however, are sensitive to sepsis definitions.

Rivaroxaban in Outpatients with Mild or Moderate COVID-19: Rationale and Design of the Study CARE (CARE - Coalition COVID-19 Brazil VIII). / Rivaroxabana em Pacientes Ambulatoriais com COVID-19 Leve ou Moderada: Fundamentação e Desenho do Estudo CARE (CARE ­ Coalition COVID-19 Brazil VIII).

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated a high risk of arterial and venous thromboembolic events as a consequence of direct viral damage to endothelial cells by SARS-CoV-2 and a procoagulant milieu due to increased biomarkers, such as D-dimer, fibrinogen, and factor VIII. Although randomized controlled trials of antithrombotic therapies have been conducted in hospitalized patients, few have evaluated the role of thromboprophylaxis in an outpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether antithrombotic prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduces the risk of venous or arterial thrombotic events, invasive ventilatory support, and death in COVID-19 outpatients. METHODS: The COVID Antithrombotic Rivaroxaban Evaluation (CARE) study, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial of rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 14 days or local standard treatment alone to prevent adverse outcomes, is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). The inclusion criteria are adults with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild or moderate symptoms without indication for hospitalization, within 7 days of symptom onset, and 1 risk factor for COVID-19 complication (> 65 years, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or other chronic lung diseases, smoking, immunosuppression, or obesity). The primary composite endpoint, which includes venous thromboembolism, invasive mechanical ventilation, major acute cardiovascular events, and mortality within 30 days of randomization, will be assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. All patients will provide informed consent. A significance level of 5% will be used for all statistical tests. RESULTS: Major thrombotic and bleeding outcomes, hospitalizations, and deaths will be centrally adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee blinded to the assigned treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The CARE study will provide relevant and contemporary information about the potential role of thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19.

FUNDAMENTO: Estudos anteriores revelaram alto risco de eventos tromboembólicos arteriais e venosos como consequência de danos virais diretos do SARS-CoV-2 em células endoteliais e um meio procoagulante devido ao aumento de biomarcadores como o D-dímero, fibrinogênio, fator VIII. Foram realizados ensaios controlados randomizados de terapias antitrombóticas em pacientes internados, no entanto, poucos estudos avaliaram o papel da tromboprofilaxia no ambiente ambulatorial. OBJETIVO: Avaliar se a profilaxia antitrombótica com rivaroxabana reduz o risco de eventos trombóticos venosos ou arteriais, suporte ventilatório invasivo e morte em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19. MÉTODOS: O estudo CARE é um ensaio randomizado, aberto, multicêntrico e controlado por rivaroxabana 10 mg uma vez por dia durante 14 dias ou tratamento local padrão isolado, para a prevenção de resultados adversos, registrado no Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). Os critérios de inclusão são adultos com infecção confirmada ou suspeita do SARS-CoV-2, com sintomas leves ou moderados, sem indicação de hospitalização, no prazo de 7 dias após o início dos sintomas e um fator de risco de complicação da COVID-19 (>65 anos, hipertensão, diabetes, asma, doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica ou outras doenças pulmonares crônicas, tabagismo, imunossupressão ou obesidade). O desfecho primário composto inclui tromboembolismo venoso, necessidade de ventilação mecânica invasiva, eventos cardiovasculares agudos maiores e mortalidade no prazo de 30 dias após a randomização, sendo avaliado segundo o princípio da intenção de tratar. Todos os pacientes assinaram termo de consentimento. Foi estabelecido um nível de significância de 5% para todos os testes estatísticos. RESULTADOS: Os principais desfechos trombóticos e hemorrágicos, hospitalizações e mortes serão avaliados centralmente por um comitê de eventos clínicos independente, sob a condição cega para a alocação dos grupos de tratamento. CONCLUSÃO: O estudo CARE fornecerá informação relevante e contemporânea sobre o possível papel da tromboprofilaxia em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19.

Antivirals for adult patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a randomised, phase II/III, multicentre, placebo-controlled, adaptive study, with multiple arms and stages. COALITION COVID-19 BRAZIL IX - REVOLUTIOn trial.

Background: Repurposed drugs for treatment of new onset disease may be an effective therapeutic shortcut. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of repurposed antivirals compared to placebo in lowering SARS-CoV2 viral load of COVID-19 patients. Methods: REVOLUTIOn is a randomised, parallel, blinded, multistage, superiority and placebo controlled randomised trial conducted in 35 centres in Brazil. We include patients aged 18 years or older admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptoms onset 9 days or less and SpO2 94% or lower at room air were eligible. All participants were randomly allocated to receive either atazanavir, daclatasvir or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir or placebo for 10 days. The primary outcome was the decay rate (slope) of the SARS-CoV-2 viral load logarithm assessed in the modified intention to-treat population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04468087. Findings: Between February 09, 2021, and August 04, 2021, 255 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to atazanavir (n = 64), daclatasvir (n = 66), sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (n = 67) or placebo (n = 58). Compared to placebo group, the change from baseline to day 10 in log viral load was not significantly different for any of the treatment groups (0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.12], -0.02 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.06], and -0.03 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.04] for atazanavir, daclatasvir and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir groups respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events between treatment groups. Interpretation: No significant reduction in viral load was observed from the use of atazanavir, daclatasvir or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir compared to placebo in hospitalised COVID-19 patients who need oxygen support with symptoms onset 9 days or less. Funding: Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (MCTI) - Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPQ); Cia Latino-Americana de Medicamentos (Clamed); Cia Industrial H. Carlos Schneider (Ciser); Hospital Research Foundation Incorporation, Australia, HCor São Paulo; Blanver Farmoquímica; Instituto de Tecnologia em Fármacos (Farmanguinhos) da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Coordenação Geral de Planejamento Estratégico (Cogeplan)/Fiocruz; and Fundação de apoio a Fiocruz (Fiotec, VPGDI-054-FIO-20-2-13).

Conditional Treatment Effect Analysis of Two Infusion Rates for Fluid Challenges in Critically Ill Patients: A Secondary Analysis of Balanced Solution versus Saline in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) Trial.

Rationale: Optimal infusion rate for fluid challenges in critically ill patients is unknown. A large clinical trial comparing two different infusion rates yielded neutral results. Conditional average treatment effect (CATE) assessment may aid in tailoring therapy. Objectives: To estimate CATE in patients enrolled in the BaSICS trial and to assess the effects of receiving CATE model-recommended treatment in terms of hospital mortality. Methods: Post hoc analysis of the BaSICS trial assessing the effect of two infusion rates for the fluid challenge (fast, 999 ml/h, control group; vs. slow, 333 ml/h, intervention group) on hospital mortality. CATE was estimated as the difference in outcome for treatment arms in counterfactuals obtained from a Bayesian model trained in the first half of the trial adjusted for predictors hypothesized to interact with the intervention. The model recommended slow or fast infusion or made no recommendation in the second half. A threshold greater than 0.90 probability of benefit was considered. Results: A total of 10,465 patients were analyzed. The model was trained in 5,230 patients and tested in 5,235 patients. A recommendation could be made in the test set in 19% of patients (14% were recommended the control group and 5% the treatment group); for 81% of patients, no recommendation could be made. Slow infusion was more frequently recommended in cases of planned admissions in younger patients; fast infusion was recommended for older patients with sepsis. Slow infusion rate in the subgroup of patients in the test set in which slow infusion was recommended by the model was associated with an odds ratio of 0.58 (95% credible interval of 0.32-0.90; 0.99 posterior probability of benefit) for hospital mortality. Fast infusion in the subgroup in which the model recommended fast infusion was associated with an odds ratio of 0.72 (credible intervals from 0.54 to 0.91; probability of benefit >0.99). Conclusions: Estimation of CATEs from counterfactual probabilities in data from BaSICS provided additional information on trial data. Agreement between treatment recommendation and actual treatment was associated with lower hospital mortality. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02875873).

Sepsis in Brazilian emergency departments: a prospective multicenter observational study.

We aimed to assess the prevalence, patient allocation adequacy, and mortality of adults with sepsis in Brazilian emergency departments (ED) in a point-prevalence 3-day investigation of patients with sepsis who presented to the ED and those who remained there due to inadequate allocation. Allocation was considered adequate if the patient was transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU), ward, or remained in the ED without ICU admission requests. Prevalence was estimated using the total ED visit number. Prognostic factors were assessed with logistic regression. Of 33,902 ED visits in 74 institutions, 183 were acute admissions (prevalence: 5.4 sepsis per 1000 visits [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.6-6.2)], and 148 were already in the ED; totaling 331 patients. Hospital mortality was 32% (103/322, 95% CI 23.0-51.0). Age (odds ratio (OR) 1.22 [95% CI 1.10-1.37]), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 1.41 [95% CI 1.28-1.57]), healthcare-associated infections (OR 2.59 [95% CI 1.24-5.50]) and low-resource institution admission (OR 2.65 [95% CI 1.07-6.90]) were associated with higher mortality. Accredited institutions (OR 0.42 [95% CI 0.21-0.86]) had lower mortality rates. Allocation within 24 h was adequate in only 52.8% of patients (public hospitals: 42.4% (81/190) vs. private institutions: 67.4% (89/132, p < 0.001) with 39.2% (74/189) of public hospital patients remaining in the ED until discharge, of whom 55.4% (41/74) died. Sepsis exerts high burden and mortality in Brazilian EDs with frequent inadequate allocation. Modifiable factors, such as resources and quality of care, are associated with reduced mortality.

Rivaroxabana em Pacientes Ambulatoriais com COVID-19 Leve ou Moderada: Fundamentação e Desenho do Estudo CARE (CARE - Coalition COVID-19 Brazil VIII) / Rivaroxaban in Outpatients with Mild or Moderate COVID-19: Rationale and Design of the Study CARE (CARE - Coalition COVID-19 Brazil VIII)

Resumo Fundamento Estudos anteriores revelaram alto risco de eventos tromboembólicos arteriais e venosos como consequência de danos virais diretos do SARS-CoV-2 em células endoteliais e um meio procoagulante devido ao aumento de biomarcadores como o D-dímero, fibrinogênio, fator VIII. Foram realizados ensaios controlados randomizados de terapias antitrombóticas em pacientes internados, no entanto, poucos estudos avaliaram o papel da tromboprofilaxia no ambiente ambulatorial. Objetivo Avaliar se a profilaxia antitrombótica com rivaroxabana reduz o risco de eventos trombóticos venosos ou arteriais, suporte ventilatório invasivo e morte em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19. Métodos O estudo CARE é um ensaio randomizado, aberto, multicêntrico e controlado por rivaroxabana 10 mg uma vez por dia durante 14 dias ou tratamento local padrão isolado, para a prevenção de resultados adversos, registrado no Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). Os critérios de inclusão são adultos com infecção confirmada ou suspeita do SARS-CoV-2, com sintomas leves ou moderados, sem indicação de hospitalização, no prazo de 7 dias após o início dos sintomas e um fator de risco de complicação da COVID-19 (>65 anos, hipertensão, diabetes, asma, doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica ou outras doenças pulmonares crônicas, tabagismo, imunossupressão ou obesidade). O desfecho primário composto inclui tromboembolismo venoso, necessidade de ventilação mecânica invasiva, eventos cardiovasculares agudos maiores e mortalidade no prazo de 30 dias após a randomização, sendo avaliado segundo o princípio da intenção de tratar. Todos os pacientes assinaram termo de consentimento. Foi estabelecido um nível de significância de 5% para todos os testes estatísticos. Resultados Os principais desfechos trombóticos e hemorrágicos, hospitalizações e mortes serão avaliados centralmente por um comitê de eventos clínicos independente, sob a condição cega para a alocação dos grupos de tratamento. Conclusão O estudo CARE fornecerá informação relevante e contemporânea sobre o possível papel da tromboprofilaxia em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19.

Abstract Background Previous studies have demonstrated a high risk of arterial and venous thromboembolic events as a consequence of direct viral damage to endothelial cells by SARS-CoV-2 and a procoagulant milieu due to increased biomarkers, such as D-dimer, fibrinogen, and factor VIII. Although randomized controlled trials of antithrombotic therapies have been conducted in hospitalized patients, few have evaluated the role of thromboprophylaxis in an outpatient setting. Objective To assess whether antithrombotic prophylaxis with rivaroxaban reduces the risk of venous or arterial thrombotic events, invasive ventilatory support, and death in COVID-19 outpatients. Methods The COVID Antithrombotic Rivaroxaban Evaluation (CARE) study, a multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial of rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 14 days or local standard treatment alone to prevent adverse outcomes, is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). The inclusion criteria are adults with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection and mild or moderate symptoms without indication for hospitalization, within 7 days of symptom onset, and 1 risk factor for COVID-19 complication (> 65 years, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or other chronic lung diseases, smoking, immunosuppression, or obesity). The primary composite endpoint, which includes venous thromboembolism, invasive mechanical ventilation, major acute cardiovascular events, and mortality within 30 days of randomization, will be assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. All patients will provide informed consent. A significance level of 5% will be used for all statistical tests. Results Major thrombotic and bleeding outcomes, hospitalizations, and deaths will be centrally adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee blinded to the assigned treatment groups. Conclusion The CARE study will provide relevant and contemporary information about the potential role of thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19.

Hierarchical endpoint analysis using win ratio in critical care: An exploration using the balanced solutions in intensive care study (BaSICS).

PURPOSE: To reanalyze the results of the Balanced Solutions in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) through hierarchical endpoint analysis with win ratio. METHODS: All patients with full data in BaSICS trial were elected for the analysis. BaSICS compared balanced solutions (Plasma Lye 148) versus 0.9% saline in critically ill patients requiring fluid challenge. The win ratio was defined as a hierarchical endpoint of 90-day mortality, recepit of kidney replacement therapy, hospital length-of-stay (LOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS. Both unstratified and stratified (by admission type: planned admission, unplanned admission with sepsis, and unplanned admission without sepsis) approaches were used. A subgroup analysis was performed in patients with traumatic brain injury. RESULTS: A total of 10,490 patients were included in the analysis, resulting in 27,587,566 unique combinations for unstratified WR. Unstratified Win ratio was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.97; 1.07), which was similar to stratified WR. No stratum in the stratified analysis resulted in significant results. Subgroup analysis confirmed the possible harm of balanced solutions in traumatic brain injury patients (WR 0.80; 95% confidence interval 0.64; 0.99). CONCLUSION: In this reanalysis of BaSICS, a win ratio analysis largely replicated the results of the main trial, yielding neutral results except for the subgroup of patients with traumatic brain injury where a signal of harm was found.

Hydroxychloroquine versus placebo in the treatment of non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (COPE - Coalition V): A double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial.

Background: Previous Randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients have found no significant difference in hospitalisation rates. However, low statistical power precluded definitive answers. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, RCT in 56 Brazilian sites. Adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 presenting with mild or moderate symptoms with ≤ 07 days prior to enrollment and at least one risk factor for clinical deterioration were randomised (1:1) to receive hydroxychloroquine 400 mg twice a day (BID) in the first day, 400 mg once daily (OD) thereafter for a total of seven days, or matching placebo. The primary outcome was hospitalisation due to COVID-19 at 30 days, which was assessed by an adjudication committee masked to treatment allocation and following the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. An additional analysis was performed only in participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by molecular or serology testing (modified ITT [mITT] analysis). This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04466540. Findings: From May 12, 2020 to July 07, 2021, 1372 patients were randomly allocated to hydroxychloroquine or placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of hospitalisation between hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (44/689 [6·4%] and 57/683 [8·3%], RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·52-1·12], respectively, p=0·16), and similar results were found in the mITT analysis with 43/478 [9·0%] and 55/471 [11·7%] events, RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·53-1·12)], respectively, p=0·17. To further complement our data, we conducted a meta-analysis which suggested no significant benefit of hydroxychloroquine in reducing hospitalisation among patients with positive testing (69/1222 [5·6%], and 88/1186 [7·4%]; RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·57-1·04]). Interpretation: In outpatients with mild or moderate forms of COVID-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine did not reduce the risk of hospitalisation compared to the placebo control. Our findings do not support the routine use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Funding: COALITION COVID-19 Brazil and EMS.