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.

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.

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.

[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.

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effect before and during hospitalization in COVID-19 outcomes: Final analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19) registry.

BACKGROUND: The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. METHODS: HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. RESULTS: We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION: RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.

Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From a Multicenter International Prospective Registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019 [HOPE-COVID19]).

OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.

COVID-19 and the impact of arterial hypertension-An analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 Registry (Italy-Spain-Germany).

BACKGROUND: A systematic analysis of concomitant arterial hypertension in COVID-19 patients and the impact of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have not been studied in a large multicentre cohort yet. We conducted a subanalysis from the international HOPE Registry (https://hopeprojectmd.com, NCT04334291) comparing COVID-19 in presence and absence of arterial hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Out of 5837 COVID-19 patients, 2850 (48.8%) patients had the diagnosis arterial hypertension. 1978/2813 (70.3%) patients were already treated with ACEI or ARBs. The clinical outcome of the present subanalysis included all-cause mortality over 40 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Patients with arterial hypertension suffered significantly more from different complications including respiratory insufficiency (60.8% vs 39.5%), heart failure (9.9% vs 3.1%), acute kidney injury (25.3% vs 7.3%), pneumonia (90.6% vs 86%), sepsis (14.7% vs 7.5%), and bleeding events (3.6% vs 1.6%). The mortality rate was 29.6% in patients with concomitant arterial hypertension and 11.3% without arterial hypertension (P < .001). Invasive and non-invasive respiratory supports were significantly more required in presence of arterial hypertension as compared without it. In the multivariate cox regression analysis, while age≥65, benzodiazepine, antidepressant at admission, elevated LDH or creatinine, respiratory insufficiency and sepsis might be a positive independent predictors of mortality, antiviral drugs, interferon treatment, ACEI or ARBs at discharge or oral anticoagulation at discharge might be an independent negative predictor of the mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and in-hospital complications might be increased in COVID-19 patients with a concomitant history of arterial hypertension. The history of ACEI or ARBs treatments does not seem to impact the outcome of these patients.

COVID-19 anosmia and gustatory symptoms as a prognosis factor: a subanalysis of the HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19) registry.

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions (OGD) are a frequent symptom of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has been proposed that the neuroinvasive potential of the novel SARS-CoV-2 could be due to olfactory bulb invasion, conversely studies suggest it could be a good prognostic factor. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prognosis value of OGD in COVID-19. These symptoms were recorded on admission from a cohort study of 5868 patients with confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 infection included in the multicenter international HOPE Registry (NCT04334291). There was statistical relation in multivariate analysis for OGD in gender, more frequent in female 12.41% vs 8.67% in male, related to age, more frequent under 65 years, presence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoke, renal insufficiency, lung, heart, cancer and neurological disease. We did not find statistical differences in pregnant (p = 0.505), patient suffering cognitive (p = 0.484), liver (p = 0.1) or immune disease (p = 0.32). There was inverse relation (protective) between OGD and prone positioning (0.005) and death (< 0.0001), but no with ICU (0.165) or mechanical ventilation (0.292). On univariable logistic regression, OGD was found to be inversely related to death in COVID-19 patients. The odds ratio was 0.26 (0.15-0.44) (p < 0.001) and Z was - 5.05. The presence of anosmia is fundamental in the diagnosis of SARS.CoV-2 infection, but also could be important in classifying patients and in therapeutic decisions. Even more knowing that it is an early symptom of the disease. Knowing that other situations as being Afro-American or Latino-American, hypertension, renal insufficiency, or increase of C-reactive protein (CRP) imply a worse prognosis we can make a clinical score to estimate the vital prognosis of the patient. The exact pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 that causes olfactory and gustative disorders remains unknown but seems related to the prognosis. This point is fundamental, insomuch as could be a plausible way to find a treatment.

Clinical profile and predictors of in-hospital mortality among older patients hospitalised for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. METHODS: post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, 'real-world' HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65-74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71-83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission <92% (OR 5.85), severe lymphopenia (<500/mm3) (OR 3.36) and qSOFA (Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score) >1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSION: patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation <92%, severe lymphopenia and qSOFA scale >1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Non-invasive ventilation for SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory failure: a subanalysis from the HOPE COVID-19 registry.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged worldwide healthcare systems and limited intensive care facilities, leading to physicians considering the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for managing SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure (ARF). METHODS: We conducted an interim analysis of the international, multicentre HOPE COVID-19 registry including patients admitted for a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection until 18 April 2020. Those treated with NIV were considered. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or need for intubation. The components of the composite endpoint were the secondary outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted predictors of the primary endpoint within those initially treated with NIV were investigated. RESULTS: 1933 patients who were included in the registry during the study period had data on oxygen support type. Among them, 390 patients (20%) were treated with NIV. Compared with those receiving other non-invasive oxygen strategy, patients receiving NIV showed significantly worse clinical and laboratory signs of ARF at presentation. Of the 390 patients treated with NIV, 173 patients (44.4%) met the composite endpoint. In-hospital death was the main determinant (147, 37.7%), while 62 patients (15.9%) needed invasive ventilation. Those requiring invasive ventilation had the lowest survival rate (41.9%). After adjustment, age (adjusted OR (adj(OR)) for 5-year increase: 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.63, p<0.001), hypertension (adj(OR) 2.95, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.61, p=0.03), room air O2 saturation <92% at presentation (adj(OR) 3.05, 95% CI 1.28 to 7.28, p=0.01), lymphocytopenia (adj(OR) 3.55, 95% CI 1.16 to 10.85, p=0.03) and in-hospital use of antibiotic therapy (adj(OR) 4.91, 95% CI 1.69 to 14.26, p=0.003) were independently associated with the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION: NIV was used in a significant proportion of patients within our cohort, and more than half of these patients survived without the need for intubation. NIV may represent a viable strategy particularly in case of overcrowded and limited intensive care resources, but prompt identification of failure is mandatory to avoid harm. Further studies are required to better clarify our hypothesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Effect of Barthel Index on the Risk of Thirty-Day Mortality in Patients With Acute Heart Failure Attending the Emergency Department: A Cohort Study of Nine Thousand Ninety-Eight Patients From the Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Emergency Departments Registry.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We assess the value of the Barthel Index (BI) in predicting 30-day mortality risk among patients with acute heart failure who are attending the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We selected 9,098 acute heart failure patients from the Acute Heart Failure in Emergency Departments registry who had BI score available both at baseline and the ED visit. Patients' data were collected from 41 Spanish hospitals during four 1- to 2-month periods between 2009 and 2016. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess the association between 30-day mortality and BI score. c Statistics were used to estimate their prognostic value. RESULTS: The mean baseline BI score was 79.4 (SD 24.6) and the mean ED BI score was 65.3 (SD 29.1). Acute functional decline (≥5-point decrease between baseline BI and ED BI score) was observed in 5,771 patients (53.4%). Within 30 days of the ED visit, 905 patients (9.9%) died. There was a steep inverse gradient in 30-day mortality risk for baseline BI and ED BI score. For instance, compared with BI score=100, a BI score of 50 to 55 doubled the mortality risk both at baseline and the ED visit. At the ED visit, a BI score of 0 to 5 carried a 5-fold increase in risk after adjustment for other risk predictors. In comparison with baseline BI score, ED BI score consistently provided greater discrimination. Neither baseline BI score nor the change in BI score from baseline to the ED visit added further prognostic value to the ED BI score. CONCLUSION: Functional status assessed by the BI score at the ED visit is a strong predictor of 30-day mortality in acute heart failure patients, with higher predictive value than baseline BI score and acute functional decline. Routine recording of BI score at the ED visit may help in decisionmaking and health care planning.

High treatment success rate for multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis using a bedaquiline-containing treatment regimen.

South African patients with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (TB) and resistance to fluoroquinolones and/or injectable drugs (extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and preXDR-TB) were granted access to bedaquiline through a clinical access programme with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria.PreXDR-TB and XDR-TB patients were treated with 24 weeks of bedaquiline within an optimised, individualised background regimen that could include levofloxacin, linezolid and clofazimine as needed. 200 patients were enrolled: 87 (43.9%) had XDR-TB, 99 (49.3%) were female and the median age was 34 years (interquartile range (IQR) 27-42). 134 (67.0%) were living with HIV; the median CD4+ count was 281 cells·µL-1 (IQR 130-467) and all were on antiretroviral therapy.16 out of 200 patients (8.0%) did not complete 6 months of bedaquiline: eight were lost to follow-up, six died, one stopped owing to side effects and one was diagnosed with drug-sensitive TB. 146 out of 200 patients (73.0%) had favourable outcomes: 139 (69.5%) were cured and seven (3.5%) completed treatment. 25 patients (12.5%) died, 20 (10.0%) were lost from treatment and nine (4.5%) had treatment failure. 22 adverse events were attributed to bedaquiline, including a QT interval corrected using the Fridericia formula (QTcF) >500 ms (n=5), QTcF increase >50 ms from baseline (n=11) and paroxysmal atrial flutter (n=1).Bedaquiline added to an optimised background regimen was associated with a high rate of successful treatment outcomes for this preXDR-TB and XDR-TB cohort.

The subset of patients with acute heart failure able to secrete relaxin-2 at pregnancy concentrations could have a longer survival: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how many patients with acute heart failure (AHF) hypersecrete relaxin-2 concentrations similar to those of pregnant women and determine their long-term outcome. METHODS: In consecutive AHF patients relaxin-2 was quantified by ELISA sandwich method. Patients were divided into pregnancy-like group (PLG, relaxin-2 ≥ 500 pg/mL) and control group (CG, relaxin-2 < 500 pg/mL). The primary outcome was all-cause death during follow-up. Secondary endpoints were prolonged hospitalisation (>10 days), combined endpoint (death, rehospitalisation, ED revisit) 30 days after discharge, and 30-day, one-year and three-year death rates. RESULTS: We included 814 patients [81 (SD = 9) years; 53.0% women] followed during 1.9 (SD 2.8) years; 517 (63.5%) died. Twenty patients (2.5%) formed the PLG (median relaxin-2 = 1459 pg/mL; IQR = 1722) and 794 the CG (median = 26; IQR = 44). There was no interaction with variables included on adjustment (age, sex, ischaemic cardiomyopathy, NT-proBNP, glycaemia, and sodium). PLG patients did not have better short-term secondary endpoints, but did show a significantly lower three-year mortality [ORadjusted = 0.17 (0.05-0.5), p = 0.003]. CONCLUSIONS: The small proportion of AHF patients achieving relaxin-2 concentrations similar to those observed in pregnancy may survive longer.

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.

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.

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.

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.