Clinical frailty, and not features of acute infection, is associated with late mortality in COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with excess mortality after hospital discharge. Identification of patients at increased risk of death following hospital discharge is needed to guide clinical monitoring and early intervention. Herein, we aimed to identify predictors of early vs. late mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A total of 471 patients with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 were followed up for 9 months [median (inter-quartile range) of follow-up time: 271 (14) days] after hospital admission. COVID-19-related signs and symptoms, laboratory features, co-morbidities, Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium (4C) mortality and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) scores were analysed by logistic regression for association with early (28 day) vs. late mortality. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the discriminative value of 4C and CFS scores for early vs. late mortality. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients died within 28 days from hospital admission. Of the remaining 351 patients, 41 died within the next 8 months. Respiratory failure, systemic inflammation, and renal impairment were associated with early mortality, while active cancer and dementia were associated with late mortality, after adjustment for age and sex. 4C mortality score and CFS were associated with both early [odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval-CI): 4C: 1.34 (1.25-1.45); CFS: 1.49 (1.33-1.66)] and late [OR (95% CI): 4C: 1.23 (1.12-1.36); CFS: 2.04 (1.62-2.56)] mortality. After adjustment for CFS, the association between 4C and late mortality was lost. By ROC analysis, 4C mortality score was superior to CFS for 28 day mortality [area under the curve (AUC) (95% CI): 0.779 (0.732-0.825) vs. 0.723 (0.673-0.773), respectively; P = 0.039]. In contrast, CFS had higher predictive value for late mortality compared with 4C mortality score [AUC (95% CI): 0.830 (0.776-0.883) vs. 0.724 (0.650-0.798), respectively; P = 0.007]. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, late mortality in COVID-19 patients is more strongly associated with premorbid clinical frailty than with severity of the acute infection phase.

Estimated pulse wave velocity improves risk stratification for all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Accurate risk stratification in COVID-19 patients consists a major clinical need to guide therapeutic strategies. We sought to evaluate the prognostic role of estimated pulse wave velocity (ePWV), a marker of arterial stiffness which reflects overall arterial integrity and aging, in risk stratification of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This retrospective, longitudinal cohort study, analyzed a total population of 1671 subjects consisting of 737 hospitalized COVID-19 patients consecutively recruited from two tertiary centers (Newcastle cohort: n = 471 and Pisa cohort: n = 266) and a non-COVID control cohort (n = 934). Arterial stiffness was calculated using validated formulae for ePWV. ePWV progressively increased across the control group, COVID-19 survivors and deceased patients (adjusted mean increase per group 1.89 m/s, P < 0.001). Using a machine learning approach, ePWV provided incremental prognostic value and improved reclassification for mortality over the core model including age, sex and comorbidities [AUC (core model + ePWV vs. core model) = 0.864 vs. 0.755]. ePWV provided similar prognostic value when pulse pressure or hs-Troponin were added to the core model or over its components including age and mean blood pressure (p < 0.05 for all). The optimal prognostic ePWV value was 13.0 m/s. ePWV conferred additive discrimination (AUC: 0.817 versus 0.779, P < 0.001) and reclassification value (NRI = 0.381, P < 0.001) over the 4C Mortality score, a validated score for predicting mortality in COVID-19 and the Charlson comorbidity index. We suggest that calculation of ePWV, a readily applicable estimation of arterial stiffness, may serve as an additional clinical tool to refine risk stratification of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 beyond established risk factors and scores.

A Patient-Oriented App (ThessHF) to Improve Self-Care Quality in Heart Failure: From Evidence-Based Design to Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) remains a major public health challenge, while HF self-care is particularly challenging. Mobile health (mHealth)-based interventions taking advantage of smartphone technology have shown particular promise in increasing the quality of self-care among these patients, and in turn improving the outcomes of their disease. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to co-develop with physicians, patients with HF, and their caregivers a patient-oriented mHealth app, perform usability assessment, and investigate its effect on the quality of life of patients with HF and rate of hospitalizations in a pilot study. METHODS: The development of an mHealth app (The Hellenic Educational Self-care and Support Heart Failure app [ThessHF app]) was evidence based, including features based on previous clinically tested mHealth interventions and selected by a panel of HF expert physicians and discussed with patients with HF. At the end of alpha development, the app was rated by mHealth experts with the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS). The beta version was tested by patients with HF, who rated its design and content by means of the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). Subsequently, a prospective pilot study (THESS-HF [THe Effect of a Specialized Smartphone app on Heart Failure patients' quality of self-care, quality of life and hospitalization rate]) was performed to investigate the effect of app use on patients with HF over a 3-month follow-up period. The primary endpoint was patients' quality of life, which was measured with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the 5-level EQ-5D version (EQ-5D-5L). The secondary endpoints were the European Heart Failure Self-care Behavior Scale (EHFScBS) score and the hospitalization rate. RESULTS: A systematic review of mHealth-based HF interventions and expert panel suggestions yielded 18 separate app features, most of which were incorporated into the ThessHF app. A total of 14 patients and 5 mHealth experts evaluated the app. The results demonstrated a very good user experience (overall PSSUQ score 2.37 [SD 0.63], where 1 is the best, and a median MARS score of 4.55/5). Finally, 30 patients (male: n=26, 87%) participated in the THESS-HF pilot study (mean age 68.7 [SD 12.4] years). A significant increase in the quality of self-care was noted according to the EHFScBS, which increased by 4.4% (SD 7.2%) (P=.002). The mean quality of life increased nonsignificantly after 3 months according to both KCCQ (mean increase 5.8 [SD 15] points, P=.054) and EQ-5D-5L (mean increase 5.6% [SD 15.6%], P=.06) scores. The hospitalization rate for the follow-up duration was 3%. CONCLUSIONS: The need for telehealth services and remote self-care management in HF is of vital importance, especially in periods such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We developed a user-friendly mHealth app to promote remote self-care support in HF. In this pilot study, the use of the ThessHF app was associated with an increase in the quality of self-care. A future multicenter study will investigate the effect of the app use on long-term outcomes in patients with HF.

Involvement of cardiovascular system as the critical point in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis and recovery.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has already caused more than 300,000 deaths worldwide. Several studies have elucidated the central role of cardiovascular complications in the disease course. Herein, we provide a concise review of current knowledge regarding the involvement of cardiovascular system in the pathogenesis and prognosis of COVID-19. We summarize data from 21 studies involving in total more than 21,000 patients from Asia, Europe, and the USA indicating that severe disease is associated with the presence of myocardial injury, heart failure, and arrhythmias. Additionally, we present the clinical and laboratory differences between recovered and deceased patients highlighting the importance of cardiac manifestations. For the infected patients, underlying cardiovascular comorbidities and particularly existing cardiovascular disease seem to predispose to the development of cardiovascular complications, which are in turn associated with higher mortality rates. We provide mechanistic insights into the underlying mechanisms including direct myocardial damage by the virus and the consequences of the hyperinflammatory syndrome developed later in the disease course. Finally, we summarize current knowledge on therapeutic modalities and recommendations by scientific societies and experts regarding the cardiovascular management of patients with COVID-19.