Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
EuroIntervention ; 16(17): 1426-1433, 2021 04 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2278564

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess clinical and prognosis differences in patients with COVID-19 and STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a nationwide registry of consecutive patients managed within 42 specific STEMI care networks, we compared patient and procedure characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in two different cohorts, according to whether or not they had COVID-19. Among 1,010 consecutive STEMI patients, 91 were identified as having COVID-19 (9.0%). With the exception of smoking status (more frequent in non-COVID-19 patients) and previous coronary artery disease (more frequent in COVID-19 patients), clinical characteristics were similar between the groups, but COVID-19 patients had more heart failure on arrival (31.9% vs 18.4%, p=0.002). Mechanical thrombectomy (44% vs 33.5%, p=0.046) and GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor administration (20.9% vs 11.2%, p=0.007) were more frequent in COVID-19 patients, who had an increased in-hospital mortality (23.1% vs 5.7%, p<0.0001), that remained consistent after adjustment for age, sex, Killip class and ischaemic time (OR 4.85, 95% CI: 2.04-11.51; p<0.001). COVID-19 patients had an increase of stent thrombosis (3.3% vs 0.8%, p=0.020) and cardiogenic shock development after PCI (9.9% vs 3.8%, p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed a significant increase in in-hospital mortality, stent thrombosis and cardiogenic shock development after PCI in patients with STEMI and COVID-19 in comparison with contemporaneous non-COVID-19 STEMI patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals , Humans , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Treatment Outcome
2.
Eur J Pediatr ; 182(4): 1897-1909, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2276543

ABSTRACT

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) is a rare but severe disease temporarily related to SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to describe the epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory findings of all MIS-C cases diagnosed in children < 18 years old in Catalonia (Spain) to study their trend throughout the pandemic. This was a multicenter ambispective observational cohort study (April 2020-April 2022). Data were obtained from the COVID-19 Catalan surveillance system and from all hospitals in Catalonia. We analyzed MIS-C cases regarding SARS-CoV-2 variants for demographics, symptoms, severity, monthly MIS-C incidence, ratio between MIS-C and accumulated COVID-19 cases, and associated rate ratios (RR). Among 555,848 SARS-CoV-2 infections, 152 children were diagnosed with MIS-C. The monthly MIS-C incidence was 4.1 (95% CI: 3.4-4.8) per 1,000,000 people, and 273 (95% CI: 230-316) per 1,000,000 SARS-CoV-2 infections (i.e., one case per 3,700 SARS-CoV-2 infections). During the Omicron period, the MIS-C RR was 8.2 (95% CI: 5.7-11.7) per 1,000,000 SARS-CoV-2 infections, which was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than that for previous variant periods in all age groups. The median [IQR] age of MIS-C was 8 [4-11] years, 62.5% male, and 80.2% without comorbidities. Common symptoms were gastrointestinal findings (88.2%) and fever > 39 °C (81.6%); nearly 40% had an abnormal echocardiography, and 7% had coronary aneurysm. Clinical manifestations and laboratory data were not different throughout the variant periods (p > 0.05).  Conclusion: The RR between MIS-C cases and SARS-CoV-2 infections was significantly lower in the Omicron period for all age groups, including those not vaccinated, suggesting that the variant could be the main factor for this shift in the MISC trend. Regardless of variant type, the patients had similar phenotypes and severity throughout the pandemic. What is Known: • Before our study, only two publications investigated the incidence of MIS-C regarding SARS-CoV-2 variants in Europe, one from Southeast England and another from Denmark. What is New: • To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating MIS-C incidence in Southern Europe, with the ability to recruit all MIS-C cases in a determined area and analyze the rate ratio for MIS-C among SARS-CoV-2 infections throughout variant periods. • We found a lower rate ratio of MISC/infections with SARS-CoV-2 in the Omicron period for all age groups, including those not eligible for vaccination, suggesting that the variant could be the main factor for this shift in the MISC trend.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Male , Humans , Female , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Spain/epidemiology , Cohort Studies
3.
Cardiovasc Res ; 118(6): 1385-1412, 2022 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1831091

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiology , Cardiovascular Diseases , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Prospective Studies
5.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 78(10): 1001-1011, 2021 09 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1371478

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) can progress to an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which involves alveolar infiltration by activated neutrophils. The beta-blocker metoprolol has been shown to ameliorate exacerbated inflammation in the myocardial infarction setting. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of metoprolol on alveolar inflammation and on respiratory function in patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS. METHODS: A total of 20 COVID-19 patients with ARDS on invasive mechanical ventilation were randomized to metoprolol (15 mg daily for 3 days) or control (no treatment). All patients underwent bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) before and after metoprolol/control. The safety of metoprolol administration was evaluated by invasive hemodynamic and electrocardiogram monitoring and echocardiography. RESULTS: Metoprolol administration was without side effects. At baseline, neutrophil content in BAL did not differ between groups. Conversely, patients randomized to metoprolol had significantly fewer neutrophils in BAL on day 4 (median: 14.3 neutrophils/µl [Q1, Q3: 4.63, 265 neutrophils/µl] vs median: 397 neutrophils/µl [Q1, Q3: 222, 1,346 neutrophils/µl] in the metoprolol and control groups, respectively; P = 0.016). Metoprolol also reduced neutrophil extracellular traps content and other markers of lung inflammation. Oxygenation (PaO2:FiO2) significantly improved after 3 days of metoprolol treatment (median: 130 [Q1, Q3: 110, 162] vs median: 267 [Q1, Q3: 199, 298] at baseline and day 4, respectively; P = 0.003), whereas it remained unchanged in control subjects. Metoprolol-treated patients spent fewer days on invasive mechanical ventilation than those in the control group (15.5 ± 7.6 vs 21.9 ± 12.6 days; P = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot trial, intravenous metoprolol administration to patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS was safe, reduced exacerbated lung inflammation, and improved oxygenation. Repurposing metoprolol for COVID-19-associated ARDS appears to be a safe and inexpensive strategy that can alleviate the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Critical Illness/therapy , Metoprolol/administration & dosage , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Adrenergic beta-1 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Injections, Intravenous , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies
7.
Rev Esp Cardiol ; 73(12): 994-1002, 2020 Dec.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-882747

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P < .001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P < .001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P = .017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.

8.
Rev Esp Cardiol ; 73(12): 975-977, 2020 Dec.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-813842
9.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) ; 73(12): 994-1002, 2020 Dec.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-752950

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P<.001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P <.001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P=.017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Management , Pandemics , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Registries , SARS-CoV-2 , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Comorbidity , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Spain/epidemiology
10.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 10(8)2020 Jul 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-693517

ABSTRACT

The Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has supposed a global health emergency affecting millions of people, with particular severity in the elderly and patients with previous comorbidities, especially those with cardiovascular disease. Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) could represent an especially vulnerable population because of the high mortality rates reported for respiratory infections. However, the number of COVID-19 cases reported among PAH and CTEPH patients is surprisingly low. Furthermore, the clinical picture that has been described in these patients is far from the severity that experts would expect. Endothelial dysfunction is a common feature between patients with PAH/CTEPH and COVID-19, leading to ventilation/perfusion mismatch, vasoconstriction, thrombosis and inflammation. In this picture, the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 plays an essential role, being directly involved in the pathophysiology of both clinical entities. Some of these common characteristics could explain the good adaptation of PAH and CTEPH patients to COVID-19, who could also have obtained a benefit from the disease's specific treatments (anticoagulant and pulmonary vasodilators), probably due to its protective effect on the endothelium. Additionally, these common features could also lead to PAH/CTEPH as a potential sequelae of COVID-19. Throughout this comprehensive review, we describe the similarities and differences between both conditions and the possible pathophysiological and therapeutic-based mechanisms leading to the low incidence and severity of COVID-19 reported in PAH/CTEPH patients to date. Nevertheless, international registries should look carefully into this population for better understanding and management.

11.
Cardiol J ; 27(5): 489-496, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-614995

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite being associated with worse prognosis in patients with COVID-19, systematic determination of myocardial injury is not recommended. The aim of the study was to study the effect of myocardial injury assessment on risk stratification of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Seven hundred seven consecutive adult patients admitted to a large tertiary hospital with confirmed COVID-19 were included. Demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory results and clinical outcomes were recorded. Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was calculated in order to quantify the degree of comorbidities. Independent association of cardiac troponin I (cTnI) increase with outcomes was evaluated by multivariate regression analyses and area under curve. In addition, propensity-score matching was performed to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. RESULTS: In the matched cohort (mean age 66.76 ± 15.7 years, 37.3% females), cTnI increase above the upper limit was present in 20.9% of the population and was associated with worse clinical outcomes, including all-cause mortality within 30 days (45.1% vs. 23.2%; p = 0.005). The addition of cTnI to a multivariate prediction model showed a significant improvement in the area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve (0.775 vs. 0.756, DC-statistic = 0.019; 95% confidence interval 0.001-0.037). Use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors was not associated with mortality after adjusting by baseline risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial injury is independently associated with adverse outcomes irrespective of baseline comorbidities and its addition to multivariate regression models significantly improves their performance in predicting mortality. The determination of myocardial injury biomarkers on hospital admission and its combination with CCI can classify patients in three risk groups (high, intermediate and low) with a clearly distinct 30-day mortality.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Cardiomyopathies/mortality , Cardiomyopathies/virology , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Aged , COVID-19 , Cardiomyopathies/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Care , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Predictive Value of Tests , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Rate , Troponin I/blood
13.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 76(3): 268-276, 2020 07 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-382030

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory-syndrome coronavirus-2 that interfaces with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This interaction has been proposed as a potential risk factor in patients treated with RAAS inhibitors. OBJECTIVES: This study analyzed whether RAAS inhibitors modify the risk for COVID-19. METHODS: The RASTAVI (Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade Benefits in Clinical Evolution and Ventricular Remodeling After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial is an ongoing randomized clinical trial randomly allocating subjects to ramipril or control groups after successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement at 14 centers in Spain. A non-pre-specified interim analysis was performed to evaluate ramipril's impact on COVID-19 risk in this vulnerable population. RESULTS: As of April 1, 2020, 102 patients (50 in the ramipril group and 52 in the control group) were included in the trial. Mean age was 82.3 ± 6.1 years, 56.9% of the participants were male. Median time of ramipril treatment was 6 months (interquartile range: 2.9 to 11.4 months). Eleven patients (10.8%) have been diagnosed with COVID-19 (6 in control group and 5 receiving ramipril; hazard ratio: 1.150; 95% confidence interval: 0.351 to 3.768). The risk of COVID-19 was increased in older patients (p = 0.019) and those with atrial fibrillation (p = 0.066), lower hematocrit (p = 0.084), and more comorbidities according to Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (p = 0.065). Admission and oxygen supply was required in 4.9% of patients (2 in the ramipril group and 3 in the control group), and 4 of them died (2 in each randomized group). A higher body mass index was the only factor increasing the mortality rate (p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: In a high-risk population of older patients with cardiovascular disease, randomization to ramipril had no impact on the incidence or severity of COVID-19. This analysis supports the maintenance of RAAS inhibitor treatment during the COVID-19 crisis. (Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade Benefits in Clinical Evolution and Ventricular Remodeling After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation [RASTAVI]; NCT03201185).


Subject(s)
Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Ramipril/adverse effects , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/chemically induced , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/chemically induced , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL