Cardiovascular Risk Assessment after COVID-19 Infection before Resuming Sports Activities - Practical Flowchart and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background: The risk of sports-related sudden cardiac arrest after COVID-19 infection can be a serious problem. There is an urgent need for evidence-based criteria to ensure patient safety before resuming exercise. Objective: To estimate the pooled prevalence of acute myocardial injury caused by COVID-19 and to provide an easy-to-use cardiovascular risk assessment toolkit prior to resuming sports activities after COVID-19 infection. Methods: We searched the Medline and Cochrane databases for articles on the prevalence of acute myocardial injury associated with COVID-19 infection. The pooled prevalence of acute myocardial injury was calculated for hospitalized patients treated in different settings (non-intensive care unit [ICU], ICU, overall hospitalization, and non-survivors). Statistical significance was accepted for p values <0.05. We propose a practical flowchart to assess the cardiovascular risk of individuals who recovered from COVID-19 before resuming sports activities. Results: A total of 20 studies (6,573 patients) were included. The overall pooled prevalence of acute myocardial injury in hospitalized patients was 21.7% (95% CI 17.3-26.5%). The non-ICU setting had the lowest prevalence (9.5%, 95% CI 1.5-23.4%), followed by the ICU setting (44.9%, 95% CI 27.7-62.8%), and the cohort of non-survivors (57.7% with 95% CI 38.5-75.7%). We provide an approach to assess cardiovascular risk based on the prevalence of acute myocardial injury in each setting. Conclusions: Acute myocardial injury is frequent and associated with more severe disease and hospital admissions. Cardiac involvement could be a potential trigger for exercise-induced clinical complications after COVID-19 infection. We created a toolkit to assist with clinical decision-making prior to resuming sports activities after COVID-19 infection.

Methods to evaluate vascular function: a crucial approach towards predictive, preventive, and personalised medicine.

Endothelium, the gatekeeper of our blood vessels, is highly heterogeneous and a crucial physical barrier with the ability to produce vasoactive and protective mediators under physiological conditions. It regulates vascular tone, haemostasis, vascular inflammation, remodelling, and angiogenesis. Several cardio-, reno-, and cerebrovascular diseases begin with the dysfunction of endothelial cells, and more recently, COVID-19 was also associated with endothelial disease highlighting the need to monitor its function towards prevention and reduction of vascular dysfunction. Endothelial cells are an important therapeutic target in predictive, preventive, and personalised (3P) medicine with upmost importance in vascular diseases. The development of novel non-invasive techniques to access endothelial dysfunction for use in combination with existing clinical imaging modalities provides a feasible opportunity to reduce the burden of vascular disease. This review summarises recent advances in the principles of endothelial function measurements. This article presents an overview of invasive and non-invasive techniques to determine vascular function and their major advantages and disadvantages. In addition, the article describes mechanisms underlying the regulation of vascular function and dysfunction and potential new biomarkers of endothelial damage. Recognising these biomarkers is fundamental towards a shift from reactive to 3P medicine in the vascular field. Identifying vascular dysfunction earlier with non-invasive or minimally invasive techniques adds value to predictive diagnostics and targeted prevention (primary, secondary, tertiary care). In addition, vascular dysfunction is a potential target for treatments tailored to the person.

Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown in urgent pacemaker implantations: A cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a decrease in patients' follow-up and interventions with cardiovascular disease. In Portugal, the consequences on emergent pacemaker implantation rates are largely unknown. We sought to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergent pacemaker implantation rate and patient profile. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical profile of the 180 patients who had pacemakers implanted in our hospital in an emergent setting from March 18, 2020, to May 17, 2020 ("lockdown") and May 19 to July 17, 2020 ("postlockdown"). This data was then directly compared to the homologous periods from the year before. RESULTS: Urgent pacemaker implantation rates during "lockdown" was lower than its homologous period (-23.7%), and cases in "postlockdown" were significantly increased (+106.9% vs. "lockdown"; +13.2% vs. May-July 2019).When comparing "lockdown" and "postlockdown," there was a tendency for a higher number of temporary pacemaker use (p = .076). Patients during "lockdown" were 7.57 times more likely to present with hypotension/shock (odds ratio 7.57; p = .013). We also noted a higher tendency for hypotension on presentation during "lockdown" (p = .054) in comparison to 2019. In comparison to its homologous 2019 period, "postlockdown" saw more patients presenting with bradycardia (p = .026). No patients were admitted to the emergency department during "lockdown" for anomalies detected on ambulatory tests. CONCLUSION: Our data show that the COVID-19 pandemic had a real impact on urgent pacemaker implantation. Patients with bradyarrhythmias are at particular risk for severe complications and should seek medical care regardless of the pandemic.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ST-elevation myocardial infarction admissions and outcomes in a Portuguese primary percutaneous coronary intervention center: Preliminary Data.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to significant changes in healthcare systems and its impact on the treatment of cardiovascular conditions, such as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), is unknown in countries where the healthcare systems were not saturated, as was the case in Portugal. As such, we aimed to assess the effect on STEMI admissions and outcomes in Portuguese centers. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, observational, retrospective study including all patients admitted to our hospital due to STEMI between the date of the first SARS-CoV-2 case diagnosed in Portugal and the end of the state of emergency (March and April 2020). Patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed and compared with the same period of 2019. RESULTS: A total of 104 STEMI patients were assessed, 55 in 2019 and 49 in 2020 (-11%). There were no significant differences between groups regarding age (62±12 vs. 65±14 years, p=0.308), gender (84.8% vs. 77.6% males, p=0.295) or comorbidities. In the 2020 group, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of patients transported to the hospital in pre-hospital emergency medical transportation (38.2% vs. 20.4%, p=0.038), an increase in system delay (49 [30-110.25] vs. 140 [90-180] minutes, p=0.019), a higher Killip-Kimball class, with a decrease in class I (74.5% vs. 51%) and an increase in class III (1.8% vs. 8.2%) and IV (5.5% vs. 18.4%) (p=0.038), a greater incidence of vasoactive support (3.7% vs. 26.5%, p=0.001), invasive mechanic ventilation usage (3.6% vs. 14.3%, p=0.056), and an increase in severe left ventricular dysfunction at hospital discharge (3.6% vs. 16.3%, p=0.03). In-hospital mortality was 14.3% in the 2020 group and 7.3% in the 2019 group p=0.200). CONCLUSION: Despite a lack of significant variation in the absolute number of STEMI admissions, there was an increase in STEMI clinical severity and significantly worse outcomes during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. An increase in system delay, impaired pre-hospital care and patient fear of in-hospital infection can partially justify these results and should be the target of future actions in further waves of the pandemic.

INTRODUÇÃO: A doença por coronavírus 2019 (COVID-19) originou alterações significativas nos sistemas de saúde e a sua influência no tratamento da patologia cardiovascular, como no caso do enfarte agudo do miocárdio com supradesnivelamento do segmento ST (EAMcSST), é desconhecida em países onde não ocorreu saturação da capacidade dos sistemas de saúde, como é o caso de Portugal. Assim, o nosso objetivo foi determinar o efeito nas admissões por EAMcSST e no seu prognóstico intra-hospitalar na região Centro de Portugal. MÉTODOS: Realizou-se um estudo unicêntrico, observacional e retrospetivo, incluindo todos os doentes admitidos no nosso hospital por EAMcSST entre a data do primeiro caso de SARS-CoV-2 em Portugal e o término do estado de emergência (março e abril de 2020). Foram avaliadas as características e os resultados dos doentes e foi realizada uma comparação com o período homólogo de 2019. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos 104 doentes com EAMcSST, 55 em 2019 e 49 em 2020 (-11%). Não se verificaram diferenças significativas entre os grupos relativamente à idade (62±12 versus 65±14 anos, p=0,308), género (84,8% mulheres versus 77,6% homens, p=0,295) ou comorbilidades. No grupo de doentes de 2020 verificou-se uma diminuição significativa na proporção de doentes transportados para o hospital pela viatura médica do Instituto Nacional de Emergência Médica (38,2% versus 20,4%, p=0,038), um aumento no atraso do sistema de saúde (49 [30-110,25] versus 140 [90-180] minutos, p=0,019), uma maior classe Killip-Kimball, com uma redução de doentes em classe I (74,5% versus 51%) e um aumento na classe III (1,8% versus 8,2%) e IV (5,5% versus 18,4%) (p=0,038), uma maior incidência de suporte vasoativo (3,7% versus 26,5%, p=0,001), de ventilação mecânica invasiva (3,6% versus 14,3%, p=0,056) e um aumento da proporção de doentes com disfunção ventricular esquerda grave na alta hospitalar (3,6% versus 16,3%, p=0,03). A mortalidade intra-hospitalar foi de 14,3% no grupo de 2020 e de 7,3% no grupo de 2019 (p=0,200). CONCLUSÃO: Apesar de não se ter verificado uma variação significativa no número de admissões por EAMcSST, existiu um aumento da gravidade, com um prognóstico intra-hospitalar significativamente mais adverso durante a pandemia por SARS-CoV-2. Um aumento no atraso do sistema de saúde, um compromisso nos serviços pré-hospitalares e o receio por parte dos doentes de contraírem uma eventual infeção hospitalar podem justificar parcialmente estes resultados e devem ser planeadas ações para diminuir o seu efeito em novos surtos pandémicos.