Fulminant myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination rescued with venoarterial ECMO: A report of two cases.

INTRODUCTION: Cases of myocarditis after COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines administration have been reported. Although the majority follow a mild course, fulminant presentations may occur. In these cases, cardiopulmonary support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) may be needed. RESULTS: We present two cases supported with V-A ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock due to myocarditis secondary to a mRNA SARS-CoV2 vaccine. One of the cases was admitted for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In both, a peripheral V-A ECMO was implanted in the cath lab using the Seldinger technique. An intra-aortic balloon pump was needed in one case for left ventricle unloading. Support could be successfully withdrawn in a mean of five days. No major bleeding or thrombosis complications occurred. Whereas an endomyocardial biopsy was performed in both, a definite microscopic diagnosis just could be reached in one of them. Treatment was the same, using 1000mg of methylprednisolone/day for three days. A cardiac magnetic resonance was performed ten days after admission, showing a significant improvement of the left ventricular ejection fraction and diffuse oedema and subepicardial contrast intake in different segments. Both cases were discharged fully recovered, with CPC 1. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine-associated fulminant myocarditis has a high morbidity and mortality but presents a high potential for recovery. V-A ECMO should be established in cases with refractory cardiogenic shock during the acute phase.

Effect of Routine Invasive vs Conservative Strategy in Older Adults With Frailty and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To our knowledge, no randomized clinical trial has compared the invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Objective: To compare outcomes of invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with NSTEMI at 1 year. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted at 13 Spanish hospitals between July 7, 2017, and January 9, 2021, and included 167 older adult (≥70 years) patients with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥4) and NSTEMI. Data analysis was performed from April 2022 to June 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to routine invasive (coronary angiography and revascularization if feasible; n = 84) or conservative (medical treatment with coronary angiography for recurrent ischemia; n = 83) strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (DAOH) from discharge to 1 year. The coprimary end point was the composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, or postdischarge revascularization. Results: The study was prematurely stopped due to the COVID-19 pandemic when 95% of the calculated sample size had been enrolled. Among the 167 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 86 (5) years, and mean (SD) Clinical Frailty Scale score was 5 (1). While not statistically different, DAOH were about 1 month (28 days; 95% CI, -7 to 62) greater for patients managed conservatively (312 days; 95% CI, 289 to 335) vs patients managed invasively (284 days; 95% CI, 255 to 311; P = .12). A sensitivity analysis stratified by sex did not show differences. In addition, we found no differences in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.74-2.85; P = .28). There was a 28-day shorter survival in the invasive vs conservatively managed group (95% CI, -63 to 7 days; restricted mean survival time analysis). Noncardiac reasons accounted for 56% of the readmissions. There were no differences in the number of readmissions or days spent in the hospital after discharge between groups. Neither were there differences in the coprimary end point of ischemic cardiac events (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.54-1.57; P = .78). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of NSTEMI in frail older patients, there was no benefit to a routine invasive strategy in DAOH during the first year. Based on these findings, a policy of medical management and watchful observation is recommended for older patients with frailty and NSTEMI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03208153.

Association of renin-angiotensin system blockers with COVID-19 diagnosis and prognosis in patients with hypertension: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The effect of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade either by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility, mortality and severity is inadequately described. We examined the association between RAS blockade and COVID-19 diagnosis and prognosis in a large population-based cohort of patients with hypertension (HTN). METHODS: This is a cohort study using regional health records. We identified all individuals aged 18-95 years from 87 healthcare reference areas of the main health provider in Catalonia (Spain), with a history of HTN from primary care records. Data were linked to COVID-19 test results, hospital, pharmacy and mortality records from 1 March 2020 to 14 August 2020. We defined exposure to RAS blockers as the dispensation of ACEi/ARBs during the 3 months before COVID-19 diagnosis or 1 March 2020. Primary outcomes were: COVID-19 infection and severe progression in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (the composite of need for invasive respiratory support or death). For both outcomes and for each exposure of interest (RAS blockade, ACEi or ARB) we estimated associations in age-, sex-, healthcare area- and propensity score-matched samples. RESULTS: From a cohort of 1 365 215 inhabitants we identified 305 972 patients with HTN history. Recent use of ACEi/ARBs in patients with HTN was associated with a lower 6-month cumulative incidence of COVID-19 diagnosis {3.78% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.69-3.86%] versus 4.53% (95% CI 4.40-4.65%); P < 0.001}. In the 12 344 patients with COVID-19 infection, the use of ACEi/ARBs was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalization with need for invasive respiratory support or death [OR = 0.91 (0.71-1.15); P = 0.426]. CONCLUSIONS: RAS blockade in patients with HTN is not associated with higher risk of COVID-19 infection or with a worse progression of the disease.