Fulminant myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination rescued with venoarterial ECMO: A report of two cases

Objectives: Cases of fulminant myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination have been reported. The most severe may need venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) support. Here we report two cases successfully rescued with V-A ECMO. Method(s): We included all the cases supported with V-A ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock due to myocarditis secondary to a mRNA SARS-COV2 vaccine in the high-volume adult ECMO Program in Vall Hebron University Hospital since January 2020. Result(s): We identified two cases (table). One of them was admitted for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In both, a peripheral V-A ECMO was implanted in the cath lab. An intra-aortic balloon pump was needed in one case for left ventricle unloading. Support could be successfully withdrawn in a mean of five days. No major bleeding or thrombosis complications occurred. Definite microscopic diagnosis could be reached in one case (Image, 3). Treatment was the same, using 1000mg of methylprednisolone/day for 3 days. A cardiac magnetic resonance 10 days after admission showed a significant improvement in systolic function and diffuse oedema and subepicardial contrast intake in different segments (Image, 1-2). Both patients were discharged fully recovered. Conclusion(s): V-A ECMO should be established in cases of COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis with refractory cardiogenic shock during the acute phase. (Table Presented).

COVID-19 IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC IMMUNE-MEDIATED INFLAMMATORY DISEASES IN AMERICA: DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN MEXICO AND ARGENTINA

BackgroundPatients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IRD) have poorer outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population.ObjectivesTo assess and compare clinical course, severity and complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with rheumatic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) from Mexico and Argentina.MethodsData from both national registries, CMR-COVID (Mexico) and SAR-COVID (Argentina), were combined. Briefly, adult IRD patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited between 08.2020 and 09.2022 in SAR-COVID and between 04.2020 and 06.2022 in CMR-COVID. Sociodemographic data, comorbidities, and DMARDs were recorded, as well as clinical characteristics, complications, and treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Descriptive analysis. Chi square, Fisher, Student T, Mann Whitney U tests and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 3709 patients were included, 1167 (31.5%) from the CMR-COVID registry and 2542 (68.5%) from the SAR-COVID registry. The majority (82.3%) were women, with a mean age of 50.4 years (SD 14.4). The most frequent IRD were rheumatoid arthritis (47.5%) and systemic lupus erythematosus (18.9%). Mexican patients were significantly older, had a higher female predominance and had higher prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis, antiphospholipid syndrome, and axial spondyloarthritis, while the Argentine patients had more frequently psoriatic arthritis and ANCA-associated vasculitis. In both cohorts, approximately 80% were in remission or low disease activity at the time of infection. Mexicans took glucocorticoids (43% vs 37%, p<0.001) and rituximab (6% vs 3%, p<0.001) more frequently. They also reported more comorbidities (48% vs 43%, p=0.012).More than 90% of patients presented symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The frequency of hospitalization was comparable between the groups (23.4%), however, the Mexicans had more severe disease (Figure 1) and a higher mortality rate (9.4% vs 4.0%, p<0.0001). After adjusting for risk factors, Mexicans were more likely to die due to COVID-19 (OR 2.2, 95%CI 1.5-3.1).ConclusionIn this cohort of patients with IRD from Mexico and Argentina with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the majority presented symptoms, a quarter were hospitalized and 6% died due to COVID-19. Mexicans presented more severe disease, and after considering risk factors they were two times more likely to die.REFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsCarolina Ayelen Isnardi Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi- sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or infuenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database, Deshire Alpizar-Rodriguez: None declared, Marco Ulises Martínez-Martínez: None declared, Rosana Quintana: None declared, Ingrid Eleonora Petkovic: None declared, Sofia Ornella: None declared, Vanessa Viviana Castro Coello: None declared, Edson Velozo: None declared, David Zelaya: None declared, María Severina: None declared, Adriana Karina Cogo: None declared, Romina Nieto: None declared, Dora Aida Pereira: None declared, Iris Jazmin Colunga-Pedraza: None declared, Fedra Irazoque-Palazuelos: None declared, GRETA CRISTINA REYES CORDERO: None declared, Tatiana Sofía Rodriguez-Reyne: None declared, JOSE ANTONIO VELOZ ARANDA: None declared, Cassandra Michele Skinner Taylor: None declared, INGRID MARIBEL JUAREZ MORA: None declared, Beatriz Elena Zazueta Montiel: None declared, Atzintli Martínez: None declared, Cesar Francisco Pacheco Tena: None declared, Guillermo Pons-Estel: None declared.

Do proctored online University exams in Covid-19 era affect final grades respect face-to-face exams?

The Covid-19 pandemic forced universities to convert their traditional faceto-face exams to online exams with doubts as to whether student cheating or technical difficulties would affect their final grades. After taking three of these exams online, we considered comparing their grades with those of previous years on traditional exams. The average mark of the traditional exams before the pandemic was 6.95 over 10, while the average mark of the three exams carried out in the Covid-19 era is 6.64. The student's t test indicated that there are no significant differences between the two types of exams in the mean (p = 0.408), the median (p = 0.378), the range (p = 0.307), the minimum (p = 0.410) and the maximum (p = 0.072). Taking online exams did not modify the exam grades compared to previous years. There is a lot of variability in similar studies in the literature due to cheating that can be performed in online exams. A proctoring system, good question design, and limited exam time can minimize these differences.

Mortality of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases: Comparison to the general population in méxico

Background: COVID-19 outcomes in Mexican patients with rheumatic diseases (RDs) in comparison to general population patients are unknown. Objectives: To compare mortality and hospitalization of COVID-19 patients with RDs and those without. Methods: We included for this study all the Mexican patients with RDs and COVID-19 registered from April 17th to October 30th, 2020 in the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry. We compare clinical and demographic characteristics of patients with RDs and COVID-19 to patients with COVID-19 that were selected randomly from the Mexican Epidemiology database (1:3). A logistic regression analysis was performed to adjust for confusion variables. Results: We included 322 patients with COVID-19 and RDs and 969 controls without RDs. Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics and comorbidities of both groups. Bivariate analysis showed that patients with RDs had higher mortality, were older, and were more frequently hospitalized. Comorbidities, such as diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular and renal diseases were also more frequent in patients with RDs. In the multivariate analysis, having a RD was no longer associated with mortality (Figure 1). Conclusion: Patients with RDs had higher comorbidities, hospitalizations, and mortality than the general population in the bivariate analysis. However, adjusted multivariate analysis showed that the odds for mortality were not increased because of having a RD. These findings suggest that the increased mortality of Mexican patients with RDs may be explained by the higher frequency of comorbidities in this population.

Factors associated with mortality in patients with rheumatic diseases and COVID-19 in Mexico

Background: As of the 25th of January 2021, more than 150 thousand deaths as consequence of COVID-19 have been reported in Mexico [1]. Advanced age, male gender and comorbidities have been described as risk factors for severe disease and mortality in general population [2]. COVID-19 mortality in Mexican patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) is unknown. Objectives: To describe characteristics of Mexican patients with RMDs and COVID-19, and to analyse factors associated with mortality. Methods: The Global Rheumatology Alliance COVID-19 (GRA) physician reported registry, is an international effort to collect information on COVID19 in adult patients with RMDs. GRA is an observational registry. The first patient from Mexico was registered on April 17, 2020. All Mexican patients registered in GRA until October 30, 2020 were included in this analysis. The association of mortality with demographic and clinical variables was estimated using logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 323 patients were registered, with a median age of 52 (IQR 41-61) years old, 166 (51.4%) patients lived in Mexico City. The most frequent RMDs were rheumatoid arthritis, 149 (46.1%) and systemic lupus erythematosus, 24 (19.8%). Over a third of patients with RMDs and COVID-19 (119 (36.8%)) were hospitalized, and 43 (13.3%) died. Table 1 shows clinical and demographic characteristics. In the univariable analysis, the absence of comorbidities was a protective factor, OR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.6). Factors associated with mortality at COVID-19 diagnosis were age over 65 years old, having type 2 diabetes, chronic renal insufficiency, treatment at COVID-19 diagnosis with corticosteroids or with CD20 inhibitors. In the multivariable adjusted analysis, these factors remained independently associated with mortality. No associations with other treatments or comorbidities at COVID-19 diagnosis were found. Conclusion: Mexican patients with RMDs and COVID-19 in the GRA physician reported registry had a mortality of 13.3%. Factors associated with mortality were those described in the general population, such as older age and being on corticosteroids and CD20 inhibitors treatment at COVID-19 diagnosis.

Complications and causes of death of patients with COVID-19 requiring extracorporeal respiratory support. A subanalysis of the ECMOVIBER study

Objective: To describe the most frequent complications and causes of death of COVID-19 patients requiring extracorporeal respiratory support. Methods: Descriptive analysis of the ECMOVIBER registry, including 25 ECMO centers in Spain (23) and Portugal (2). All adult (>18 years old) COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous ECMO between 1st March and 1st December 2020 were included. The follow up period ended 1st December 2020. Demographic data, comorbidities and complications during ECMO [acute kidney injury, ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP), hemorrhage and thrombosis] were recorded. Results are described using median (interquartile range) or frequency (percentage). Results: A total of 316 patients [age 55 (47-60), 253 (80%) male] were included. Only 21 (7%) patients had prior respiratory disease and 12 (4%) chronic kidney disease. One hundred and thirty-one (41%) patients received anticoagulation prior to cannulation and 94 (30%) suffered concomitant bacterial coinfection prior to ECMO initiation. Eighty-two (26%) patients developed acute kidney injury of which 73 (89%) required continuous renal replacement therapy;50 (16%) suffered at least one thrombotic episode during the extracorporeal support (47 deep venous thrombosis, 3 pulmonary embolism) and 41 (13%) presented haemorrhagic shock. In 109 (34%) patients clots in the circuit were identified and 20 of them (18%) required at least one circuit change. The most frequent infectious complication was VAP [154 patients (49%)]. One hundred and twenty (38%) patients died on ECMO and 9 (3%) after decannulation. The most frequently reported causes of death were multiorgan dysfunction [37 (29%)], persistent respiratory failure due to COVID- 19 [23 (18%)] and septic shock [20 (15%)]. Death during cannulation occurred in 11 cases (3% of the total population). Conclusions: Complications during extracorporeal respiratory support in COVID-19 patients are frequent. VAP may complicate up to half of the cases. Persistent COVID-19 was the cause of death of almost one fifth of the population.

Complications during ECMO support in patients with COVID-19: A prospective observational study

Objective: To analyze the complications developed in patients with COVID-19 supported with ECMO and to evaluate their impact in outcomes. Methods: Prospective observational study including all the COVID-19 patients with ECMO support in the ICU of the VHUH from 15 March to 30 July. Infectious, renal, thrombotic, hemorrhagic and other complications during support were prospectively registered. Continuous variables expressed as median (interquartile range) and categorical variables as number (percentage). The impact of complications in mortality was analyzed using Chi-squared or Fisheŕs exact test as appropriate. Results: Twenty-four patients [55 (46-57) years, 58% male, BMI 32.1 (27-35)] received ECMO support [23 (96%) VV-ECMO] during 11 (5.7-19.2) days. The longest run lasted 67 days (awake ECMO). Eighteen (75%) patients could be decannulated and 16 (67%) were discharged alive from the ICU. Fifteen (63%) patients suffered hemorrhagic complications and 12 (48%) thrombotic events, with 7 (29%) patients needing circuit change. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was diagnosed in 8 (33%) patients and acute kidney injury (AKI) in 7 (29%). Other complications were air leak (5 patients), fungal infection (4), CMV replication (3) and cardiac tamponade (1). Hemorrhage and thrombosis were not associated with mortality (P=1.0 and P=0.6, respectively). VAP and AKI were neither associated with mortality (P=0.3 both). Conclusions: Complications are frequent in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO, especially thrombotic and hemorrhagic. VAP and AKI might be studied in further studies to confirm their association with a higher risk of mortality.

[Recommendations on neurophysiological studies during the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Recomendaciones sobre estudios neurofisiológicos en tiempos de pandemia de COVID-19.

At the end of January, the current outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus disease was declared an important international public health emergency. In Spain, since the government declared the state of alarm on 14 March 2020, doctors responsible for carrying out neurophysiological tests have been performing them without any consensus criterion or clear safety guidelines for doctors, technicians or patients. The following recommendations, based on current knowledge of the disease and therefore liable to change in the future, are proposed when the pandemic appears to have entered a process of decreasing virulence and, with it, the strict containment measures established to date. However, in view of the possibility of a second wave of the pandemic, it seems necessary to establish basic and minimum recommendations to respect the patient's right to appropriate care, similar to that provided prior to the pandemic, and to maintain minimum safety standards for the patients themselves and for the doctors, technicians and health personnel carrying out these tests. These recommendations concern the constitution of a priority based on the reason for consultation, the establishment of calls to check the patient's clinical situation before going to the outpatient department and the rules for carrying out neurophysiological tests, which are generally based on the preservation of hospital circuits, respect for and observation of the known barriers to contagion of this disease, and the use of disposable material. These recommendations are of particular interest, especially given the uncertainty of not knowing the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 infection in the coming weeks or months.

TITLE: Recomendaciones sobre estudios neurofisiológicos en tiempos de pandemia de COVID-19.A finales de enero, la Organización Mundial de la Salud declaró el brote actual de la enfermedad por coronavirus COVID-19 como emergencia de salud pública de importancia internacional. En España, desde que el 14 de marzo de 2020 el Gobierno decretase el estado de alarma, los médicos encargados de las pruebas neurofisiológicas las hemos estado realizando sin tener un criterio consensuado ni unas pautas adecuadas de seguridad claras para los facultativos, los técnicos ni los pacientes. Las siguientes recomendaciones, basadas en el actual conocimiento de la enfermedad y, por tanto, susceptibles de variaciones en el futuro, se proponen cuando la pandemia parece que ha entrado en un proceso de disminución de la virulencia y, con ello, las medidas estrictas de confinamiento hasta ahora mantenidas; sin embargo, ante la posibilidad de una segunda oleada de rebrotes de la pandemia, parece necesario establecer unas recomendaciones básicas y de mínimos para respetar el derecho del paciente a una atención adecuada, similar a la previa a la pandemia, y mantener unos mínimos de seguridad para los propios pacientes y los médicos, técnicos y personal sanitario que realizan estas pruebas. Se trata de recomendaciones sobre el establecimiento de una prioridad basándose en el motivo de consulta, el establecimiento de llamadas de comprobación de la situación clínica del paciente antes de acudir a la consulta externa y las normas de ejecución de las pruebas neurofisiológicas, que se basan, en general, en la preservación de circuitos hospitalarios, el respeto y el cuidado de las barreras de contagio conocidas de esta enfermedad, y la utilización de material desechable. Estas recomendaciones son de especial interés, sobre todo por la incertidumbre de no saber la evolución de la infección por el SARS-CoV-2 en las próximas semanas o meses.

Predictive factors of COVID-19 in patients with negative RT-qPCR.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the factors associated with false negatives in RT-qPCR in patients with mild-moderate symptoms of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of non-hospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-qPCR-positive cases and 52 RT-qPCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two rapid diagnostic tests - RDTs (Combined - cRDT and Differentiated - dRDT). The association between symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection was evaluated by non-conditional logistic regression, with estimation of Odds Ratio. RESULTS: A total of 110 subjects were studied, 52% of whom were women (mean age: 48.2±11.0 years). There were 42.3% of negative RT-qPCRs that were positive in some RDTs. Fever over 38°C (present in 35.5% of cases) and anosmia (present in 41.8%) were the symptoms most associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, a relationship that remained statistically significant in patients with negative RT-qPCR and some positive RDT (aOR=6.64; 95%CI=1.33-33.13 and aOR=19.38; 95% CI=3.69-101.89, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RT-qPCR is the technique of choice in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is not exempt from false negatives. Our results show that patients who present mild or moderate symptoms with negative RT-qPCR, but with fever and/or anosmia, should be considered as suspicious cases and should be evaluated with other diagnostic methods.