Recurrent Myocarditis Treated with Intravenous Immune Globulin and Steroids.

BACKGROUND Myocarditis is an inflammatory process that can present as acute or chronic with either focal or diffuse involvement of the myocardium. Its incidence is approximately 1.5 million cases per year worldwide. In the United States, viral infection is the most common cause of myocarditis. Most of the reported cases are singular and self-limiting in nature. We present the case of severe recurrent myocarditis in a young adult who was transferred to the Intensive Care Unit. CASE REPORT An 18-year-old man presented with chest pressure and troponin I 33 ng/mL. He had presented to another hospital with similar symptoms 3 months prior and was diagnosed with myocarditis that had resolved with colchicine. As part of his workup during this admission, coronary angiogram was normal and biopsy obtained without evidence of an inflammatory process; however, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was consistent with myocarditis and Coxsackie B titers indicated prior infection, leading to a diagnosis of clinically suspected recurrent viral myocarditis. He was treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IV Ig) and a steroid taper, with rapid improvement in symptoms over the ensuing weeks without evidence of further recurrence or sequelae. CONCLUSIONS We present a case of recurrent Coxsackie B myocarditis based on presentation and imaging. Myocarditis is an important diagnosis to consider when a young, healthy individual presents with chest pain mimicking acute coronary syndrome, especially during the COVID pandemic. If there is evidence of myocarditis on MRI or endomyocardial biopsy, immunosuppressive therapy should be considered in patients with recurrent and severe presentations.

Practice Patterns and Patient Outcomes After Widespread Adoption of Remote Heart Failure Care.

BACKGROUND: An unprecedented shift to remote heart failure outpatient care occurred during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Given challenges inherent to remote care, we studied whether remote visits (video or telephone) were associated with different patient usage, clinician practice patterns, and outcomes. METHODS: We included all ambulatory cardiology visits for heart failure at a multisite health system from April 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019 (pre-COVID) or April 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020 (COVID era), resulting in 10 591 pre-COVID in-person, 7775 COVID-era in-person, 1009 COVID-era video, and 2322 COVID-era telephone visits. We used multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regressions with propensity weighting and patient clustering to study ordering practices and outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with in-person visits, video visits were used more often by younger (mean 64.7 years [SD 14.5] versus 74.2 [14.1]), male (68.3% versus 61.4%), and privately insured (45.9% versus 28.9%) individuals (P<0.05 for all). Remote visits were more frequently used by non-White patients (35.8% video, 37.0% telephone versus 33.2% in-person). During remote visits, clinicians were less likely to order diagnostic testing (odds ratio, 0.20 [0.18-0.22] video versus in-person, 0.18 [0.17-0.19] telephone versus in-person) or prescribe ß-blockers (0.82 [0.68-0.99], 0.35 [0.26-0.47]), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (0.69 [0.50-0.96], 0.48 [0.35-0.66]), or loop diuretics (0.67 [0.53-0.85], 0.45 [0.37-0.55]). During telephone visits, clinicians were less likely to prescribe ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitor/ARB (angiotensin receptor blockers)/ARNIs (angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors; 0.54 [0.40-0.72]). Telephone visits but not video visits were associated with higher rates of 90-day mortality (1.82 [1.14-2.90]) and nonsignificant trends towards higher rates of 90-day heart failure emergency department visits (1.34 [0.97-1.86]) and hospitalizations (1.36 [0.98-1.89]). CONCLUSIONS: Remote visits for heart failure care were associated with reduced diagnostic testing and guideline-directed medical therapy prescription. Telephone but not video visits were associated with increased 90-day mortality.

Challenges and the innovations in the care of advanced heart failure patients during COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic underscored our healthcare system's unpreparedness to manage an unprecedented pandemic. Heart failure (HF) physicians from 14 different academic and private practice centers share their systems' challenges and innovations to care for patients with HF, heart transplantation, and patients on LVAD support during the COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss measures implemented to alleviate the fear in seeking care, ensure continued optimization of guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT), manage the heart transplant waiting list, continue essential outpatient monitoring of anticoagulation in LVAD patients and surveillance testing post-heart transplant, and prevent physician burnout. This collaborative work can build a foundation for better preparation in the face of future challenges.

Remote monitoring in heart failure: current and emerging technologies in the context of the pandemic.

The incidence of heart failure (HF) remains high and patients with HF are at risk for frequent hospitalisations. Remote monitoring technologies may provide early indications of HF decompensation and potentially allow for optimisation of therapy to prevent HF hospitalisations. The need for reliable remote monitoring technology has never been greater as the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid expansion of a new mode of healthcare delivery: the virtual visit. With the convergence of remote monitoring technologies and reliable method of remote healthcare delivery, an understanding of the role of both in the management of patients with HF is critical. In this review, we outline the evidence on current remote monitoring technologies in patients with HF and highlight how these advances may benefit patients in the context of the current pandemic.

COVID-19 vaccination in our transplant recipients: The time is now.

We are entering 2021 with an expanding and effective COVID-19 vaccine armamentarium. Recent interim results from COVID-19 vaccine trials, including more than 80,000 participants worldwide, demonstrate remarkable efficacy and low rate of serious adverse events. Based on experience with other vaccines in transplant recipients and knowing the risk of severe COVID-19 in this population, we believe that COVID-19 vaccines provide potential benefit with minimal risk. We strongly support and encourage COVID-19 vaccination of our transplant recipients.

Trends in US Heart Transplant Waitlist Activity and Volume During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

IMPORTANCE: Solid organ transplants have declined significantly during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in the US. Limited data exist regarding changes in heart transplant (HT). OBJECTIVE: To describe national and regional trends in waitlist inactivations, waitlist additions, donor recovery, and HT volume during COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This descriptive cross-sectional study used publicly available data from the United Network for Organ Sharing and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, using 8 prespecified United Network for Organ Sharing regions. Adult (18 years or older) HT candidates listed and deceased donors recovered between January 19 to May 9, 2020. EXPOSURES: COVID-19 pandemic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Changes in waitlist inactivations, waitlist additions, deceased donor recovery, and transplant volumes from the pre-COVID-19 (January 19-March 15, 2020) to the COVID-19 era (March 15-May 9, 2020). Density mapping and linear regression with interrupted time series analysis were used to characterize changes over time and changes by region. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 era, there were 600 waitlist inactivations compared with 343 during the pre-COVID era (75% increase). Waitlist additions decreased from 637 to 395 (37% reduction). These changes were most profound in the Northeast and Great Lakes regions with high rates of COVID-19. Deceased donor recovery decreased by 26% from 1878 to 1395; the most significant decrease occurred in the North Midwest despite low COVID-19 prevalence. Heart transplant volumes were significantly reduced across all regions except the Northwest. The largest decrease was seen in the Northeast where COVID-19 case rates were highest. From the pre-COVID-19 era to the COVID-19 era, there was significant regional variation in waitlist additions (eg, 69% decrease in the Northeast vs 8.5% increase in the South Midwest; P < .001) and deceased donor recovery (eg, 41% decrease in North Midwest vs 16% decrease in South Midwest; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Heart transplant volumes have been significantly reduced in recent months, even in regions with a lower prevalence of COVID-19 cases. This has been accompanied by increased waitlist inactivations, decreased waitlist additions, and decreased donor recovery. Future studies are needed to determine if the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with changes in waitlist mortality.