EASIX for Prediction of Outcome in Hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and has evoked a pandemic that challenges public health-care systems worldwide. Endothelial cell dysfunction plays a key role in pathophysiology, and simple prognosticators may help to optimize allocation of limited resources. Endothelial activation and stress index (EASIX) is a validated predictor of endothelial complications and outcome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Aim of this study was to test if EASIX could predict life-threatening complications in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2-positive, hospitalized patients were enrolled onto a prospective non-interventional register study (n=100). Biomarkers were assessed at hospital admission. Primary endpoint was severe course of disease (mechanical ventilation and/or death, V/D). Results were validated in 126 patients treated in two independent institutions. RESULTS: EASIX at admission was a strong predictor of severe course of the disease (odds ratio for a two-fold change 3.4, 95%CI 1.8-6.3, p<0.001), time to V/D (hazard ratio (HR) for a two-fold change 2.0, 95%CI 1.5-2.6, p<0.001) as well as survival (HR for a two-fold change 1.7, 95%CI 1.2-2.5, p=0.006). The effect was retained in multivariable analysis adjusting for age, gender, and comorbidities and could be validated in the independent cohort. At hospital admission EASIX correlated with increased suppressor of tumorigenicity-2, soluble thrombomodulin, angiopoietin-2, CXCL8, CXCL9 and interleukin-18, but not interferon-alpha. CONCLUSION: EASIX is a validated predictor of COVID19 outcome and an easy-to-access tool to segregate patients in need for intensive surveillance.

Interpretation of myocardial injury subtypes in COVID-19 disease per fourth version of Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Application of the 4th version of Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (UDMI) to characterize rates and prognostic relevance of myocardial injury in COVID-19 disease. METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre observational study enrolled 104 patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox regression were used to identify influence of acute or chronic myocardial injury on a composite primary (mortality, incident acute respiratory distress syndrome, incident mechanical ventilation) and secondary endpoint (mortality, incident acute myocardial injury during hospitalization, incident venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or stroke). RESULTS: A total of 27 (26.0%) patients presented with chronic myocardial injury, and 19 (18.3%) with acute myocardial injury. 42 patients(40.4%) developed an incident myocardial injury during hospitalization. The presence of acute or chronic myocardial injury on admission and incident myocardial injury during hospitalization were associated with higher rates of endpoints. Independent predictors for the primary endpoint were higher severity stages according to Siddiqi et al. classification system and history of dyslipidaemia. Maximal hs-cTnT and D-dimer concentrations during hospitalization showed an association (r = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Objective description of myocardial injury according to the 4th UDMI in the current COVID-19 pandemic is crucial in order to discriminate patients with acute myocardial infarction and acute, chronic or incident myocardial injury.

Validation of two severity scores as predictors for outcome in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: An established objective and standardized reporting of clinical severity and disease progression in COVID-19 is still not established. We validated and compared the usefulness of two classification systems reported earlier-a severity grading proposed by Siddiqi and a system from the National Australian COVID-19 guideline. Both had not been validated externally and were now tested for their ability to predict complications. METHODS: In this retrospective, single-centre observational study, patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 across all severity stages were enrolled. The clinical severity was graded at admission and during hospitalization. Multivariate Cox regression was used to identify independent risk factors for mortality, a composite primary (mortality, incident acute respiratory distress syndrome, incident mechanical ventilation), a secondary endpoint (mortality, incident acute myocardial injury, incident venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or stroke) and progression of severity grades. RESULTS: Of 109 patients 17 died, 31 and 48 developed the primary and secondary endpoint, respectively. Worsening of the severity grade by at least one stage occurred in 27 and 28 patients, respectively. Siddiqi and Australian classification were identified as independent predictors for the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.30, p<0.001 and aHR 2.08, p<0.001), for the secondary endpoint (aHR 2.12, p<0.001 and aHR 1.79, p<0.001) and mortality (aHR 2.30, p = 0.071 and aHR 1.98, p = 0.017). Both classification systems showed very good agreement regarding initial grading and good agreement regarding progression of severity stages. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized and objective severity grading is useful to unequivocally stratify patients presenting with COVID-19 for their individual risk of complications.

Analysis of Symptoms of COVID-19 Positive Patients and Potential Effects on Initial Assessment.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a highly contagious virus, significantly impacting Germany among other countries since its emergence. Because of heterogeneous symptoms and a subset of patients even being asymptomatic at presentation, fast identification of infected patients remains challenging. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is the evaluation of different patient groups with a focus on symptoms and pre-existing illness at admission, as this is important for initial assessment and adequate emergency care. METHODS: COVID-19 positive patients at the University Hospital Heidelberg were retrospectively analyzed for disease history and symptoms at the initial presentation as well as mortality. The authors obtained institutional review board (IRB) approval by the Ethics Committee (Medical Faculty of Heidelberg University) prior to commencing the study. RESULTS: Dyspnea was more common in patients admitted to intermediate care/intensive care units (48 vs 13%, P<0.001) and showed a significantly higher percentage in the deceased (91 vs 48%, P=0.004). The symptoms of all presenting patients were highly variable, and many manifestations commonly associated with COVID-19 like cough, fever, and sore throat were only detected in a subset of patients, 60%, 43%, and 33%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dyspnea was present significantly more often in patients dying of COVID-19 compared to all patients admitted to the IMC/ICU, necessitating adequate observation and monitoring. In all presenting patients, initial symptoms showed large variation; therefore, COVID should be considered as a main differential diagnosis at every patient presentation, and patients with high pre-test probability should, if possible, be isolated until testing results are known.