Daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and hydroxychloroquine for pre-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial in healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (TDF/FTC) as pre-exposure prophylaxis on COVID-19 risk. METHODS: EPICOS is a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted in Spain, Bolivia, and Venezuela. Healthcare workers with negative SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG test were randomly assigned to the following: daily TDF/FTC plus HCQ for 12 weeks, TDF/FTC plus HCQ placebo, HCQ plus TDF/FTC placebo, and TDF/FTC placebo plus HCQ placebo. Randomization was performed in groups of four. Primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed, symptomatic COVID-19. We also studied any (symptomatic or asymptomatic) COVID-19. We compared group-specific 14-week risks via differences and ratios with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Of 1002 individuals screened, 926 (92.4%) were eligible and there were 14 cases of symptomatic COVID-19: 220 were assigned to the TDF/FTC plus HCQ group (3 cases), 231 to the TDF/FTC placebo plus HCQ group (3 cases), 233 to the TDF/FTC plus HCQ placebo group (3 cases), and 223 to the double placebo group (5 cases). Compared with the double placebo group, 14-week risk ratios (95% CI) of symptomatic COVID-19 were 0.39 (0.00-1.98) for TDF + HCQ, 0.34 (0.00-2.06) for TDF, and 0.49 (0.00-2.29) for HCQ. Corresponding risk ratios of any COVID-19 were 0.51 (0.21-1.00) for TDF + HCQ, 0.81 (0.44-1.49) for TDF, and 0.73 (0.41-1.38) for HCQ. Adverse events were generally mild. DISCUSSION: The target sample size was not met. Our findings are compatible with both benefit and harm of pre-exposure prophylaxis with TDF/FTC and HCQ, alone or in combination, compared with placebo.

The use of remote monitoring of cardiac implantable devices during the COVID-19 pandemic: an EHRA physician survey.

It is unclear to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the use of remote monitoring (RM) of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The present physician-based European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey aimed to assess the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on RM of CIEDs among EHRA members and how it changed the current practice. The survey comprised 27 questions focusing on RM use before and during the pandemic. Questions focused on the impact of COVID-19 on the frequency of in-office visits, data filtering, reasons for initiating in-person visits, underutilization of RM during COVID-19, and RM reimbursement. A total of 160 participants from 28 countries completed the survey. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, there was a significant increase in the use of RM in patients with pacemakers (PMs) and implantable loop recorders (ILRs) during the COVID-19 pandemic (PM 24.2 vs. 39.9%, P = 0.002; ILRs 61.5 vs. 73.5%, P = 0.028), while there was a trend towards higher utilization of RM for cardiac resynchronization therapy-pacemaker (CRT-P) devices during the pandemic (44.5 vs. 55%, P = 0.063). The use of RM with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) and CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) did not significantly change during the pandemic (ICD 65.2 vs. 69.6%, P = 0.408; CRT-D 65.2 vs. 68.8%, P = 0.513). The frequency of in-office visits was significantly lower during the pandemic (P < 0.001). Nearly two-thirds of participants (57 out of 87 respondents), established new RM connections for CIEDs implanted before the pandemic with 33.3% (n = 29) delivering RM transmitters to the patient's home address, and the remaining 32.1% (n = 28) activating RM connections during an in-office visit. The results of this survey suggest that the crisis caused by COVID-19 has led to a significant increase in the use of RM of CIEDs.

Reduction in new cardiac electronic device implantations in Catalonia during COVID-19.

AIMS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, concern regarding its effect on the management of non-communicable diseases has been raised. However, there are no data on the impact on cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) implantation rates. We aimed to determine the impact of SARS-CoV2 on the monthly incidence rates and type of pacemaker (PM) and implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) implantations in Catalonia before and after the declaration of the state of alarm in Spain on 14 March 2020. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data on new CIED implantations for 2017-20 were prospectively collected by nine hospitals in Catalonia. A mixed model with random intercepts corrected for time was used to estimate the change in monthly CIED implantations. Compared to the pre-COVID-19 period, an absolute decrease of 56.5% was observed (54.7% in PM and 63.7% in ICD) in CIED implantation rates. Total CIED implantations for 2017-19 and January and February 2020 was 250/month (>195 PM and >55 ICD), decreasing to 207 (161 PM and 46 ICD) in March and 131 (108 PM and 23 ICD) in April 2020. In April 2020, there was a significant fall of 185.25 CIED implantations compared to 2018 [95% confidence interval (CI) 129.6-240.9; P < 0.001] and of 188 CIED compared to 2019 (95% CI 132.3-243.7; P < 0.001). No significant differences in the type of PM or ICD were observed, nor in the indication for primary or secondary prevention. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial decrease in CIED implantations was observed in Catalonia. Our findings call for measures to avoid long-term social impact.