Blood Coagulation and Beyond: Position Paper from the Fourth Maastricht Consensus Conference on Thrombosis.

The Fourth Maastricht Consensus Conference on Thrombosis included the following themes. Theme 1: The "coagulome" as a critical driver of cardiovascular disease. Blood coagulation proteins also play divergent roles in biology and pathophysiology, related to specific organs, including brain, heart, bone marrow, and kidney. Four investigators shared their views on these organ-specific topics. Theme 2: Novel mechanisms of thrombosis. Mechanisms linking factor XII to fibrin, including their structural and physical properties, contribute to thrombosis, which is also affected by variation in microbiome status. Virus infection-associated coagulopathies perturb the hemostatic balance resulting in thrombosis and/or bleeding. Theme 3: How to limit bleeding risks: insights from translational studies. This theme included state-of-the-art methodology for exploring the contribution of genetic determinants of a bleeding diathesis; determination of polymorphisms in genes that control the rate of metabolism by the liver of P2Y12 inhibitors, to improve safety of antithrombotic therapy. Novel reversal agents for direct oral anticoagulants are discussed. Theme 4: Hemostasis in extracorporeal systems: the value and limitations of ex vivo models. Perfusion flow chamber and nanotechnology developments are developed for studying bleeding and thrombosis tendencies. Vascularized organoids are utilized for disease modeling and drug development studies. Strategies for tackling extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-associated coagulopathy are discussed. Theme 5: Clinical dilemmas in thrombosis and antithrombotic management. Plenary presentations addressed controversial areas, i.e., thrombophilia testing, thrombosis risk assessment in hemophilia, novel antiplatelet strategies, and clinically tested factor XI(a) inhibitors, both possibly with reduced bleeding risk. Finally, COVID-19-associated coagulopathy is revisited.

Effects of adding the second drainage cannula in severely hypoxemic patients supported with VV ECMO due to COVID-19-associated ARDS.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a recognized method of support in patients with severe and refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. While veno-venous (VV) ECMO is the most common type, some patients with severe hypoxemia may require modifications to the ECMO circuit. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of adding a second drainage cannula to the circuit in patients with refractory hypoxemia, on their gas exchange, mechanical ventilation, ECMO settings, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective study based on a single-center institutional registry including all consecutive cases of COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO admitted to the Centre of Extracorporeal Therapies in Warsaw between March 1, 2020 and March 1, 2022. We selected patients who had an additional drainage cannula inserted. Changes in ECMO and ventilator settings, blood oxygenation, and hemodynamic parameters, as well as clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Of 138 VV ECMO patients, 12 (9%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Ten patients (83%) were men, and mean age was 42.2 ± 6.8. An addition of drainage cannula resulted in a significant raise in ECMO blood flow (4.77 ± 0.44 to 5.94 ± 0.81 [L/min]; p = 0.001), and the ratio of ECMO blood flow to ECMO pump rotations per minute (RPM), whereas the raise in ECMO RPM alone was not statistically significant (3432 ± 258 to 3673 ± 340 [1/min]; p = 0.064). We observed a significant drop in ventilator FiO2 and a raise in PaO2 to FiO2 ratio, while blood lactates did not change significantly. Nine patients died in hospital, one was referred to lung transplantation center, two were discharged uneventfully. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an additional drainage cannula in severe ARDS associated with COVID-19 allows for an increased ECMO blood flow and improved oxygenation. However, we observed no further improvement in lung-protective ventilation and poor survival.

Transfusion practice in patients receiving VV ECMO (PROTECMO): a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion thresholds are usually higher than in other patients who are critically ill. Available guidelines suggest a restrictive approach, but do not provide specific recommendations on the topic. The main aim of this study was, in a short timeframe, to describe the actual values of haemoglobin and the rate and the thresholds for transfusion of PRBC during VV ECMO. METHODS: PROTECMO was a multicentre, prospective, cohort study done in 41 ECMO centres in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia. Consecutive adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who were receiving VV ECMO were eligible for inclusion. Patients younger than 18 years, those who were not able to provide informed consent when required, and patients with an ECMO stay of less than 24 h were excluded. Our main aim was to monitor the daily haemoglobin concentration and the value at the point of PRBC transfusion, as well as the rate of transfusions. The practice in different centres was stratified by continent location and case volume per year. Adjusted estimates were calculated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting, accounting for baseline and time varying confounding. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2018, and Feb 22, 2021, 604 patients were enrolled (431 [71%] men, 173 [29%] women; mean age 50 years [SD 13·6]; and mean haemoglobin concentration at cannulation 10·9 g/dL [2·4]). Over 7944 ECMO days, mean haemoglobin concentration was 9·1 g/dL (1·2), with lower concentrations in North America and high-volume centres. PRBC were transfused on 2432 (31%) of days on ECMO, and 504 (83%) patients received at least one PRBC unit. Overall, mean pretransfusion haemoglobin concentration was 8·1 g/dL (1·1), but varied according to the clinical rationale for transfusion. In a time-dependent Cox model, haemoglobin concentration of less than 7 g/dL was consistently associated with higher risk of death in the intensive care unit compared with other higher haemoglobin concentrations (hazard ratio [HR] 2·99 [95% CI 1·95-4·60]); PRBC transfusion was associated with lower risk of death only when transfused when haemoglobin concentration was less than 7 g/dL (HR 0·15 [0·03-0·74]), although no significant effect in reducing mortality was reported for transfusions for other haemoglobin classes (7·0-7·9 g/dL, 8·0-9·9 g/dL, or higher than 10 g/dL). INTERPRETATION: During VV ECMO, there was no universally accepted threshold for transfusion, but PRBC transfusion was invariably associated with lower mortality only when done with haemoglobin concentration of less than 7 g/dL. FUNDING: Extracorporeal Life Support Organization.

Cerebrovascular Complications of COVID-19 on Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence of cerebrovascular complications in COVID-19 requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is limited. Our study aims to characterize the prevalence and risk factors of stroke secondary to COVID-19 in patients on venovenous ECMO. DESIGN: We analyzed prospectively collected observational data, using univariable and multivariable survival modeling to identify risk factors for stroke. Cox proportional hazards and Fine-Gray models were used, with death and discharge treated as competing risks. SETTING: Three hundred eighty institutions in 53 countries in the COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium (COVID Critical) registry. PATIENTS: Adult COVID-19 patients who were supported by venovenous ECMO. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five hundred ninety-five patients (median age [interquartile range], 51 yr [42-59 yr]; male: 70.8%) had venovenous ECMO support. Forty-three patients (7.2%) suffered strokes, 83.7% of which were hemorrhagic. In multivariable survival analysis, obesity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.05-4.59) and use of vasopressors before ECMO (aHR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.08-5.22) were associated with an increased risk of stroke. Forty-eight-hour post-ECMO Pa co2 -pre-ECMO Pa co2 /pre-ECMO Pa co2 (relative ΔPa co2 ) of negative 26% and 48-hour post-ECMO Pa o2 -pre-ECMO Pa o2 /pre-ECMO Pa o2 (relative ΔPa o2 ) of positive 24% at 48 hours of ECMO initiation were observed in stroke patients in comparison to relative ΔPa co2 of negative 17% and relative ΔPa o2 of positive 7% in the nonstroke group. Patients with acute stroke had a 79% in-hospital mortality compared with 45% mortality for stroke-free patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the association of obesity and pre-ECMO vasopressor use with the development of stroke in COVID-19 patients on venovenous ECMO. Also, the importance of relative decrease in Pa co2 and moderate hyperoxia within 48 hours after ECMO initiation were additional risk factors.

In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation. METHODS: EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required. FUNDING: None.

Extracorporeal life support provision in COVID-19 patients - An international EuroELSO 2022 update survey.

INTRODUCTION: An analysis on the ECLS use for patients with respiratory or cardiac support in COVID-19 based on an international response to EuroELSO survey, aims to generate a more comprehensive understanding of ECLS role during the recent viral pandemic. METHODS: EuroELSO announced the survey at the 10th annual congress in London, May 2022. The survey covered 26 multiple-choice questions. RESULTS: The survey returned 69 questionnaires from 62 centers across 22 European countries and seven centers across five non-European countries. Most of the centers providing ECLS for COVID-19 patients had more than 30 runs for respiratory support since December 2019. In the same period, at least 31 runs in adult COVID-19 patients have been performed in 48 of 69 centers (69.6%). The reported pediatric data from 18 centers is limited to less than the patients per center. CONCLUSION: Majority of the COVID-19 patients received respiratory ECLS support and adult patients dominated. The indications and contraindications are broadly aligned with available guidelines. Most of the centers considered age >65 or biological age as a relative or absolute contraindication for ECLS in COVID-19. ECLS withdrawal criteria in COVID-19 are controversial because the long-term outcomes after ECLS in COVID-19 and the impact of critical illness and the impact of long-COVID are still not known.

Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) for COVID-19 Patients: A Multi-Institutional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, COVID-19 was announced as a global pandemic. The first COVID-19 patient was connected to an ECMO device in Israel during that time. Since then, over 200 patients have required ECMO support due to COVID-19 infection. The present study is a multi-institutional analysis of all COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous (VV) ECMO in Israel. The aim was to characterize and compare the survivors and deceased patients as well as establish risk factors for mortality. METHODS: This retrospective multi-institutional study was conducted from March 2020 to March 2021 in eleven of twelve ECMO centers operating in Israel. All COVID-19 patients on VV ECMO support were included in the cohort. The patients were analyzed based on their comorbidities, procedural data, adverse event on ECMO, and outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the deceased and the surviving patients. RESULTS: The study included 197 patients, of which 150 (76%) were males, and the mean age was 50.7 ± 12 years. Overall mortality was 106 (54%). Compared with the deceased subjects, survivors were significantly younger (48 ± 11 vs. 53 ± 12 years), suffered less from ischemic heart disease (IHD) (3% vs. 12%), and were ventilated for a significantly shorter period (≤4 days) prior to cannulation (77% vs. 63%). Patients in the deceased group experienced more kidney failure and sepsis. Rates of other complications were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, we conclude that early cannulation (≤4 days) of younger patients (≤55 years) may improve overall survival and that a history of IHD might indicate a reduced prognosis.

COVID-19 and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has recently and rapidly emerged and developed into a global pandemic. In SARS-CoV-2 patients with refractory respiratory failure, there may be a role for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) as a life-saving rescue intervention. METHODS: This review summarizes the evidence gathered until June 12, 2020; electronic databases were screened for pertinent reports on coronavirus and V-V ECMO. Search was conducted by two independent investigators; keywords used were SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, ECMO, and extracorporeal life support (ECLS). RESULTS: Many patients with COVID-19 experience moderate symptoms and a relatively quick recovery, but others must be admitted into the intensive care unit due to severe respiratory failure and often must be mechanically ventilated. Further deterioration may require institution of extracorporeal oxygenation. Infection mechanisms may trigger "cytokine storm," an inflammatory disorder notable for multi-organ system failure; together with other metabolic and hematological changes, these amplify the changes pertinent to ECMO therapy, often exaggerating blood coagulation disorders. Thirty-two studies were found describing experiences with ECMO in the treatment of COVID-19. Of 4,912 COVID-19 patients, 2,119 (43%) developed ARDS and 2,086 (42%) were transferred to the ICU; 1,015 patients (21%) were treated with ECMO. While in an overall cohort, observed mortality was 640 (13%), the mortality within ECMO subgroups reached up to 34.6% (range 0-100%). CONCLUSION: The efficacy of ECMO treatment for COVID-19 is largely dependent on the expertise of the center in ECLS due to the interplay between the changes in hematological and inflammatory modulators associated with both COVID-19 and ECMO. In order to support gas exchange during early infection with SARS-CoV-2, ECMO has a strong rationale for the treatment of the most critically ill patients. Due to the limited resources during a global pandemic, ECMO should be reserved for only the most severe cases of COVID-19.

Selection criteria and triage in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during coronavirus disease 2019.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic changed the way we had to approach hospital- and intensive care unit (ICU)-related resource management, especially for demanding techniques required for advanced support, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). RECENT FINDINGS: Availability of ICU beds and ECMO machines widely varies around the world. In critical conditions, such a global pandemic, the establishment of contingency capacity tiers might help in defining to which conditions and subjects ECMO can be offered. A frequent reassessment of the resource saturation, possibly integrated within a regional healthcare coordination system, may be of help to triage the patients who most likely will benefit from advanced techniques, especially when capacities are limited. SUMMARY: Indications to ECMO during the pandemic should be fluid and may be adjusted over time. Candidacy of patients should follow the same prepandemic rules, taking into account the acute disease, the burden of any eventual comorbidity and the chances of a good quality of life after recovery; but the current capacity of healthcare system should also be considered, and frequently reassessed, possibly within a wide hub-and-spoke healthcare system. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/COCC/A43.

The ProtekDuo in ECMO configuration for ARDS secondary to COVID-19: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the results of the ProtekDuo cannula applied for dedicated right ventricular support with oxygenator in ARDS secondary to COVID-19. METHODS: Systematic literature search in NHS library, Medline (Pubmed) and EMBASE using appropriate keywords as well as PICOS and PRISMA approach. RESULTS: Out of 285 publications found, 5 publications met the search criteria and were included in this review. A total of 194 patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19 underwent ProtekDuo placement to establish a combination of respiratory [veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO)] and right ventricular support. Patients treated using the ProtekDuo cannula had survival rates between 59% and 89% throughout the five studies, and a significant survival benefit when compared to an invasive ventilation group or compared to dual site V-V ECMO or other double lumen ECMO cannulas. One study focused on extubation and discontinuation of ventilator support, which could be achieved in 100% of ProtekDuo patients. An association for reduced incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and use of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) could be shown when the ProtekDuo was used. CONCLUSION: Only limited literature is available for the ProtekDuo in V-P ECMO configuration in the setting of COVID-19 ARDS and should be interpreted with caution. Data on the ProtekDuo is suggestive for lower rates of mortality, AKI and CRRT as compared to other respiratory support modalities.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: Myocardial damage occurs in up to 25% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. While veno-venous extracorporeal life support (V-V ECLS) is used as respiratory support, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be required for severe cardiac dysfunction. This systematic review summarizes the available literature regarding MCS use rates, disease drivers for MCS initiation, and MCS outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PubMed/EMBASE were searched until October 14, 2021. Articles including adults receiving ECLS for COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of MCS use. Secondary outcomes included mortality at follow-up, ECLS conversion rate, intubation-to-cannulation time, time on ECLS, cardiac diseases, use of inotropes, and vasopressors. RESULTS: Twenty-eight observational studies (comprising both ECLS-only populations and ECLS patients as part of larger populations) included 4218 COVID-19 patients (females: 28.8%; median age: 54.3 years, 95%CI: 50.7-57.8) of whom 2774 (65.8%) required ECLS with the majority (92.7%) on V-V ECLS, 4.7% on veno-arterial ECLS and/or Impella, and 2.6% on other ECLS. Acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest were reported in 7.8%, 9.7%, and 6.6% of patients, respectively. Vasopressors were used in 37.2%. Overall, 3.1% of patients required an ECLS change from V-V ECLS to MCS for heart failure, myocarditis, or myocardial infarction. The median ECLS duration was 15.9 days (95%CI: 13.9-16.3), with an overall survival of 54.6% and 28.1% in V-V ECLS and MCS patients. One study reported 61.1% survival with oxy-right ventricular assist device. CONCLUSION: MCS use for cardiocirculatory compromise has been reported in 7.3% of COVID-19 patients requiring ECLS, which is a lower percentage compared to the incidence of any severe cardiocirculatory complication. Based on the poor survival rates, further investigations are warranted to establish the most appropriated indications and timing for MCS in COVID-19.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults: evidence and implications.

Rates of survival with functional recovery for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are notably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is emerging as a modality to improve prognosis by augmenting perfusion to vital end-organs by utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during conventional CPR and stabilizing the patient for interventions aimed at reversing the aetiology of the arrest. Implementing this emergent procedure requires a substantial investment in resources, and even the most successful ECPR programs may nonetheless burden healthcare systems, clinicians, patients, and their families with unsalvageable patients supported by extracorporeal devices. Non-randomized and observational studies have repeatedly shown an association between ECPR and improved survival, versus conventional CPR, for in-hospital cardiac arrest in select patient populations. Recently, randomized controlled trials suggest benefit for ECPR over standard resuscitation, as well as the feasibility of performing such trials, in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest within highly coordinated healthcare delivery systems. Application of these data to clinical practice should be done cautiously, with outcomes likely to vary by the setting and system within which ECPR is initiated. ECPR introduces important ethical challenges, including whether it should be considered an extension of CPR, at what point it becomes sustained organ replacement therapy, and how to approach patients unable to recover or be bridged to heart replacement therapy. The economic impact of ECPR varies by health system, and has the potential to outstrip resources if used indiscriminately. Ideally, studies should include economic evaluations to inform health care systems about the cost-benefits of this therapy.

[Mechanical complications of acute myocardial infarction: from diagnosis to treatment]. / Le complicanze meccaniche dell'infarto miocardico acuto: dalla diagnosi al trattamento.

Post-infarction mechanical complications include left ventricular free-wall rupture, ventricular septal rupture, and papillary muscle rupture. With the advent of early reperfusion strategies, including thrombolysis and percutaneous coronary intervention, these events now occur in fewer than 0.3% of patients following acute myocardial infarction. However, unfortunately, there has been no parallel decrease in associated mortality rates over the past two decades. Moreover, during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic the incidence of mechanical complications resulting from ST-elevation myocardial infarction has possibly risen. Early diagnosis and prompt management are crucial to improving outcomes. Although some percutaneous device repair approaches are available, surgical treatment remains the gold standard for these catastrophic post-infarction complications. The timing of surgery, also related to the type of complication and patient's clinical conditions, and the possible role of mechanical circulatory supports before and after surgery, represent main topics of debate that still need to be fully addressed.

Immunological and Hematological Response in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has recently and rapidly emerged and developed into a global pandemic. Through the renin-angiotensin system, the virus may impact the lung circulation, but the expression on endothelium may conduct to its activation and further systemic damage. While precise mechanisms underlying these phenomena remain to be further clarified, the understanding of the disease, its clinical course, as well as its immunological and hematological implications is of paramount importance in this phase of the pandemic. METHODS: This review summarizes the evidence gathered until 12 June; electronic databases were screened for pertinent reports on coronavirus and inflammatory and hematological changes. Search was conducted by two independent investigators; keywords used were "SARS-CoV-2," "COVID-19," "inflammation," "immunological," and "therapy." RESULTS: The viral infection is able to trigger an excessive immune response in predisposed individuals, which can result in a "cytokine storm" that presents an hyperinflammation state able to determine tissue damage and vascular damage. An explosive production of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α IL-1ß and others occurs, greatly exaggerating the generation of molecule-damaging reactive oxygen species. These changes are often followed by alterations in hematological parameters. Elucidating those changes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients could help to understand the pathophysiology of disease and may provide early clues to diagnosis. Several studies have shown that hematological parameters are markers of disease severity and suggest that they mediate disease progression. According to the available literature, the primary hematological symptoms-associated COVID-19, and which distinguish patients with severe disease from patients with nonsevere disease, are lymphocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, and a significant increase in D-dimer levels. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers a complex response altering inflammatory, hematological, and coagulation parameters. Measuring these alterations at certain time points may help identify patients at high risk of disease progression and monitor the disease severity.

Acute infective endocarditis during COVID-19 pandemic time: The dark side of the moon.

The COVID-19 pandemic has remarkably impacted the hospital management and the profile of patients suffering from acute cardiovascular syndromes. Among them, acute infective endocarditis (AIE) represented a rather frequent part of these urgent/emergent procedures. The paper by Liu et al. has clearly shown the higher risk features which patients with a diagnosis of AIE presented at hospital admission during the first part (first and second waves) of the outbreak, often requiring challenging operations, but fortunately not associated with the worse outcome if compared to results obtained before the SARS-2 pandemic. The report discussed herein presents several other aspects worth discussion and comments, particularly in relation to hospital management and postdischarge outcome which certainly deserve to be highlighted, but also further investigations.