Incremental prognostic value of biventricular longitudinal strain and high-sensitivity troponin I in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Whether the combination of ventricular strain with high-sensitivity troponin I (hs-TNI) has an incremental prognostic value in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has not been evaluated. The study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of biventricular longitudinal strain and its combination with hs-TNI in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A total of 160 COVID-19 patients who underwent both echocardiography and hs-TNI testing were enrolled in our study. COVID-19 patients were divided into two groups (critical and non-critical) according to severity-of-illness. The clinical characteristics, cardiac structure and function were compared between the two groups. The prognostic value of biventricular longitudinal strain and its combination with hs-TNI were evaluated by logistic regression analyses and receiver operating characteristic curves. Left ventricular longitudinal strain (LV LS) and right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain (RVFWLS) were determined by 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography. RESULTS: The LV LS and RVFWLS both were significantly lower in critical patients than non-critical patients (LV LS: -16.6±2.4 vs -17.9±3.0, P = .003; RVFWLS :-18.8±3.6 vs -23.9±4.4, P<.001). During a median follow-up of 60 days, 23 (14.4%) patients died. The multivariant analysis revealed that LV LS and RVFWLS [Odd ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.533 (1.131-2.079), P = .006; 1.267 (1.036-1.551), P = .021, respectively] were the independent predictors of higher mortality. Further, receiver-operating characteristic analysis revealed that the accuracy for predicting death was greater for the combination of hs-TNI levels with LV LS than separate LV LS (AUC: .91 vs .77, P = .001), and the combination of hs-TNI levels with RVFWLS than RVFWLS alone (AUC: .89 vs .83, P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that the combination of ventricular longitudinal strain with hs-TNI can provide higher accuracy for predicting mortality in COVID-19 patients, which may enhance risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

Early vs. Late Onset Cardiac Injury and Mortality in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients in Wuhan.

Background: Increasing evidence points to cardiac injury (CI) as a common coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complication. The characteristics of early CI (occurred within 72 h of admission) and late CI (occurred after 72 h of admission) and its association with mortality in COVID-19 patients is unknown. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients confirmed with COVID-19 in Union Hospital (Wuhan, China) from Jan 29th to Mar 15th, 2020. Clinical outcomes (discharge, or death) were monitored to April 15, 2020, the latest date of follow-up. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, as well as treatment and prognosis were collected and analyzed in patients with early, late CI and without CI. Results: A total of 196 COVID-19 patients were included for analysis. The median age was 65 years [interquartile range (IQR) 56-73 years], and 112 (57.1%) were male. Of the 196 COVID-19 patients, 49 (25.0%) patients had early and 20 (10.2%) patients had late CI, 56.6% developed Acute-Respiratory-Distress-Syndrome (ARDS) and 43 (21.9%) patients died. Patients with any CI were more likely to have developed ARDS (87.0 vs. 40.2%) and had a higher in-hospital mortality than those without (52.2 vs. 5.5%, P < 0.001). Among CI subtypes, a significantly higher risk of in-hospital death was found in patients with early CI with recurrence [19/49 patients, adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 7.184, 95% CI 1.472-35.071] and patients with late CI (adjusted OR = 5.019, 95% CI 1.125-22.388) compared to patients with early CI but no recurrence. Conclusions: CI can occur early on or late after, the initial 72 h of admission and is associated with ARDS and an increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Both late CI and recurrent CI after the initial episode were associated with worse outcomes than patients with early CI alone. This study highlights the importance of early examination and periodical monitoring of cardiac biomarkers, especially for patients with early CI or at risk of clinical deterioration.

Echocardiographic Characteristics and Outcome in Patients With COVID-19 Infection and Underlying Cardiovascular Disease.

Background: The cardiac manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) remain unclear. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of echocardiographic parameters in patients with COVID-19 infection and underlying CVD. Methods: One hundred fifty-seven consecutive hospitalized COVID-19 patients were enrolled. The left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) structure and function were assessed using bedside echocardiography. Results: Eighty-nine of the 157 patients (56.7%) had underlying CVD. Compared with patients without CVD, those with CVD had a higher mortality (22.5 vs. 4.4%, p = 0.002) and experienced more clinical events including acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute heart injury, or deep vein thrombosis. CVD patients presented with poorer LV diastolic and RV systolic function compared to those without CVD. RV dysfunction (30.3%) was the most frequent, followed by LV diastolic dysfunction (9.0%) and LV systolic dysfunction (5.6%) in CVD patients. CVD patients with high-sensitivity troponin I (hs-TNI) elevation or requiring mechanical ventilation therapy demonstrated worsening RV function compared with those with normal hs-TNI or non-intubated patients, whereas LV systolic or diastolic function was similar. Impaired RV function was associated with elevated hs-TNI level. RV function and elevated hs-TNI level were independent predictors of higher mortality in COVID-19 patients with CVD. Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19 infection and underlying CVD displayed impaired LV diastolic and RV function, whereas LV systolic function was normal in most patients. Importantly, RV function parameters are predictive of higher mortality.

Value of Bedside Lung Ultrasound in Severe and Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound (LUS) is an effective imaging modality that can differentiate pathological lung from non-diseased lung. We aimed to explore the value of bedside LUS in patients with severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated lung injury. METHODS: Sixty-three severe and 33 critical hospitalized subjects with COVID-19 were enrolled in this study. Bedside LUS was performed in all subjects; chest computed tomography was performed on the same day as bedside LUS in 23 cases. The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones. LUS score based on B-lines and lung consolidation was evaluated. RESULTS: The most common abnormality of LUS was the various forms of B-lines, detected in 93 (96.9%) subjects; as the second most frequent abnormality, 80 (83.3%) subjects exhibited lung consolidation, mainly located in the posterior lung region. Twenty-four (25.0%) subjects had pleural line abnormalities, and 16 (16.7%) had pleural effusion; 78 (81.3%) subjects had ≥ 2 abnormal LUS patterns, and 93 (96.9%) had bilateral lung involvement. The proportion of bilateral or unilateral lung consolidation and pleural effusion in the critical COVID-19 group were higher than that in the severe group (P < .05). The lung consolidation of critical subjects showed a marked increase in most lung areas, including bilateral lateral lung, posterior lung, and left anterior-inferior lung area. The median (interquartile range) LUS scores of critical cases were higher than those of severe cases: left: 14 (12-17) vs 7 (5-12); right: 14 (10-16) vs 8 (3-12); bilateral: 28 (23-31) vs 15 (8-22) (P < .001 for all). There was a good correlation between the LUS score and the chest computed tomography score (r = 0.887, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The most common abnormal LUS pattern in subjects with severe and critical COVID-19 pneumonia was B-lines, followed by lung consolidation. Bedside LUS can provide important information for pulmonary involvement in patients with COVID-19.

Prognostic Value of Right Ventricular Ejection Fraction Assessed by 3D Echocardiography in COVID-19 Patients.

Background: RVEF (right ventricular ejection fraction) measured by three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) has been used in evaluating right ventricular (RV) function and can provide useful prognostic information in other various cardiovascular diseases. However, the prognostic value of 3D-RVEF in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unknown. We aimed to investigate whether 3D-RVEF can predict the mortality of COVID-19 patients. Methods: A cohort of 128 COVID-19-confirmed patients who had undergone echocardiography were studied. Thirty-one healthy volunteers were also enrolled as controls. COVID-19 patients were divided into three subgroups (general, severe, and critical) according to COVID-19 severity-of-illness. Conventional RV structure and function parameters, RV free wall longitudinal strain (FWLS) and 3D-RVEF were acquired. RVFWLS was measured by two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography. RVEF was acquired by 3DE. Results: Compared with controls, 2D-RVFWLS and 3D-RVEF were both significantly decreased in COVID-19 patients (-27.2 ± 4.4% vs. -22.9 ± 4.8%, P < 0.001; 53.7 ± 4.5% vs. 48.5 ± 5.8%, P < 0.001). Critical patients were more likely to have a higher incidence of acute cardiac injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and worse prognosis than general and severe patients. The critical patients exhibited larger right-heart chambers, worse RV fractional area change (RVFAC), 2D-RVFWLS, and 3D-RVEF and higher proportion of pulmonary hypertension than general and severe patients. Eighteen patients died during a median follow-up of 91 days. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed the acute cardiac injury, ARDS, RVFAC, RVFWLS, and 3D-RVEF were independent predictors of death. 3D-RVEF (chi-square to improve 18.3; P < 0.001), RVFAC (chi-square to improve 4.5; P = 0.034) and 2D-RVFWLS (chi-square to improve 5.1; P = 0.024) all provided additional prognostic value of higher mortality over clinical risk factors. Moreover, the incremental predictive value of 3D-RVEF was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than RVFAC and RVFWLS. Conclusion: 3D-RVEF was the most robust independent predictor of mortality in COVID-19 patients and provided a higher predictive value over conventional RV function parameters and RVFWLS, which may be helpful to identify COVID-19 patients at a higher risk of death.

Biventricular Longitudinal Strain Predict Mortality in COVID-19 Patients.

Background: Biventricular longitudinal strain has been recently demonstrated to be predictive of poor outcomes in various cardiovascular settings. Therefore, this study sought to investigate the prognostic implications of biventricular longitudinal strain in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: We enrolled 132 consecutive patients with COVID-19. Left ventricular global longitudinal strain from the apical four-chamber views (LV GLS4CH) and right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain (RV FWLS) were obtained using two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography. Results: Compared with patients without cardiac injury, those with cardiac injury had higher levels of coagulopathy and inflammatory biomarkers, higher incidence of complications, more mechanical ventilation therapy, and higher mortality. Patients with cardiac injury displayed decreased LV GLS4CH and RV FWLS, elevated pulmonary artery systolic pressure, and higher proportion of pericardial effusion. Higher biomarkers levels of inflammation and cardiac injury, and the presence of pericardial effusion were correlated with decreases in LV GLS4CH and RV FWLS. During hospitalization, 19 patients died. Compared with survivors, LV GLS4CH and RV FWLS were impaired in non-survivors. At a 3-month follow-up after discharge, significant improvements were observed in LV GLS4CH and RV FWLS. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that LV GLS4CH [hazard ratio: 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08 to 1.84; P = 0.011] and RV FWLS (HR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.09-1.52; P = 0.003) were independent predictors of higher mortality in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions: LV GLS4CH and RV FWLS are independent and strong predictors of higher mortality in COVID-19 patients and can track improvement during the convalescent phase of their illness. Therefore, biventricular longitudinal strain may be crucial for risk stratification and serial follow-up in patients with COVID-19.

Prognostic value of bedside lung ultrasound score in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19. METHOD: The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated. RESULTS: The median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

Deep Vein Thrombosis in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Outcome

BACKGROUND: To investigate deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we performed a single institutional study to evaluate its prevalence, risk factors, prognosis, and potential thromboprophylaxis strategies in a large referral and treatment center. METHODS: We studied a total of 143 patients with COVID-19 from January 29, 2020 to February 29, 2020. Demographic and clinical data, laboratory data, including ultrasound scans of the lower extremities, and outcome variables were obtained, and comparisons were made between groups with and without DVT. RESULTS: Of the 143 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (age 63±14 years, 74 [51.7%] men), 66 patients developed lower extremity DVT (46.1%: 23 [34.8%] with proximal DVT and 43 [65.2%] with distal DVT). Compared with patients who did not have DVT, patients with DVT were older and had a lower oxygenation index, a higher rate of cardiac injury, and worse prognosis, including an increased proportion of deaths (23 [34.8%] versus 9 [11.7%];P=0.001) and a decreased proportion of patients discharged (32 [48.5%] versus 60 [77.9%];P<0.001). Multivariant analysis showed an association only between CURB-65 (confusion status, urea, respiratory rate, and blood pressure) score 3 to 5 (odds ratio, 6.122;P=0.031), Padua prediction score ≥4 (odds ratio, 4.016;P=0.04), D-dimer >1.0 µg/mL (odds ratio, 5.818;P<0.014), and DVT in this cohort, respectively. The combination of a CURB-65 score 3 to 5, a Padua prediction score ≥4, and D-dimer >1.0 µg/mL has a sensitivity of 88.52% and a specificity of 61.43% for screening for DVT. In the subgroup of patients with a Padua prediction score ≥4 and whose ultrasound scans were performed >72 hours after admission, DVT was present in 18 (34.0%) patients in the subgroup receiving venous thromboembolism prophylaxis versus 35 (66.0%) patients in the nonprophylaxis group (P=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of DVT is high and is associated with adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism may be protective in patients with a Padua protection score ≥4 after admission. Our data seem to suggest that COVID-19 is probably an additional risk factor for DVT in hospitalized patients.

Prognostic Value of Right Ventricular Longitudinal Strain in Patients With COVID-19.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate whether right ventricular longitudinal strain (RVLS) was independently predictive of higher mortality in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Background: RVLS obtained from 2-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography has been recently demonstrated to be a more accurate and sensitive tool to estimate right ventricular (RV) function. The prognostic value of RVLS in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. Methods: One hundred twenty consecutive patients with COVID-19 who underwent echocardiographic examinations were enrolled in our study. Conventional RV functional parameters, including RV fractional area change, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, and tricuspid tissue Doppler annular velocity, were obtained. RVLS was determined using 2-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography. RV function was categorized in tertiles of RVLS. Results: Compared with patients in the highest RVLS tertile, those in the lowest tertile were more likely to have higher heart rate; elevated levels of D-dimer and C-reactive protein; more high-flow oxygen and invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of acute heart injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and deep vein thrombosis; and higher mortality. After a median follow-up period of 51 days, 18 patients died. Compared with survivors, nonsurvivors displayed enlarged right heart chambers, diminished RV function, and elevated pulmonary artery systolic pressure. Male sex, acute respiratory distress syndrome, RVLS, RV fractional area change, and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion were significant univariate predictors of higher risk for mortality (p < 0.05 for all). A Cox model using RVLS (hazard ratio: 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15 to 1.53; p < 0.001; Akaike information criterion = 129; C-index = 0.89) was found to predict higher mortality more accurately than a model with RV fractional area change (Akaike information criterion = 142, C-index = 0.84) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (Akaike information criterion = 144, C-index = 0.83). The best cutoff value of RVLS for prediction of outcome was -23% (AUC: 0.87; p < 0.001; sensitivity, 94.4%; specificity, 64.7%). Conclusions: RVLS is a powerful predictor of higher mortality in patients with COVID-19. These results support the application of RVLS to identify higher risk patients with COVID-19.