The paradox of pulmonary arterial hypertension in Italy in the COVID-19 era: is risk of disease progression around the corner?

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has led to significant restrictions on routine medical care. We conducted a multicentre nationwide survey of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) to determine the consequences of governance measures on PAH management and risk of poor outcome in patients with COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study, which included 25 Italian centres, considered demographic data, the number of in-person visits, 6-min walk and echocardiographic test results, brain natriuretic peptide/N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide test results, World Health Organization functional class assessment, presence of elective and non-elective hospitalisation, need for treatment escalation/initiation, newly diagnosed PAH, incidence of COVID-19 and mortality rates. Data were collected, double-checked and tracked by institutional records between March 1 and May 1, 2020, to coincide with the first peak of COVID-19 and compared with the same time period in 2019. RESULTS: Among 1922 PAH patients, the incidences of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 were 1.0% and 0.46%, respectively, with the latter comparable to that in the overall Italian population (0.34%) but associated with 100% mortality. Less systematic activities were converted into more effective remote interfacing between clinicians and PAH patients, resulting in lower rates of hospitalisation (1.2% versus 1.9%) and related death (0.3% versus 0.5%) compared with 2019 (p<0.001). A high level of attention is needed to avoid the potential risk of disease progression related to less aggressive escalation of treatment and the reduction in new PAH diagnoses compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: A cohesive partnership between healthcare providers and regional public health officials is needed to prioritise PAH patients for remote monitoring by dedicated tools.

The use of chest ultrasonography in suspected cases of COVID-19 in the emergency department.

AIM: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus-specific reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) represents the diagnostic gold standard. We explored the value of chest ultrasonography to predict positivity to SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR in suspected COVID-19 cases. PATIENTS & METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspect COVID-19 were included if they had fever and/or history of cough and/or dyspnea. Lung ultrasound score (LUSS) was computed according to published methods. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included. A 3-variable model based on aspartate transaminase (AST) > upper limit of normal, LUSS >12 and body temperature >37.5°C yielded an overall accuracy of 91%. CONCLUSION: A simple LUSS-based model may represent a powerful tool for initial assessment in suspected cases of COVID-19.

Lung ultrasound as diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The aim of this study was to explore the role of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to verify its utility in the prediction of lung disease's severity and outcome. Fifty-three consecutive patients presenting to the Emergency Department of Santa Maria delle Grazie Hospital with high suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 on samples obtained from nasopharyngeal swab as well as complete proper diagnostic work-up that included clinical evaluation, laboratory tests, blood gas analyses, chest CT and LUS. A semiquantitative analysis of B-lines distribution was performed to calculate the LUS score. Patients were divided into two groups according to the results of both SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test and other exams (Group A = pneumonia due to SARS-CoV2 infection vs Group B = no SARS-CoV2 infection and another definite diagnosis). LUS showed an excellent accuracy in predicting the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (area under the ROC curve of 0.92 with a sensibility of 73% and a specificity of 89% a the cut-off of 12.5). LUS score was more impaired in SARS-CoV-2 patients (18.1 ± 6.0 vs 7.6 ± 5.9, p < 0.00001) and it is significantly negatively correlated with PF ratio values (r = - 0.719, p < 0.0001). An intrahospital mortality rate of 46% was found; patients with adverse outcome had significant higher value of LUS, PF, LDH, and APACHE II score. None of these parameters was predictive of mortality. LUS is a useful tool for the early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and for the evaluation of the disease severity, but does not predict mortality. Further studies with repeated evaluations of LUS score are needed to further explore the role of LUS in the assessment of severity in SARS-CoV-2 disease and in the monitoring of the response to treatments.

Sex-related differences in COVID-19 lethality.

Many countries have been affected by the worldwide outbreak of COVID-19. Among Western countries, Italy has been particularly hit at the beginning of the pandemic, immediately after China. In Italy and elsewhere, women seem to be less affected than men by severe/fatal COVID-19 infection, regardless of their age. Although women and men are affected differently by this infection, very few studies consider different therapeutic approaches for the two sexes. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these differences may help to find appropriate and sex specific therapies. Here, we consider that other mechanisms are involved to explain this difference, in addition to the protection attributable to oestrogens. Several X-linked genes (such as ACE2) and Y-linked genes (SRY and SOX9) may explain sex differences. Cardiovascular comorbidities are among the major enhancers of virus lethality. In addition, the number of sex-independent, non-genetic factors that can change susceptibility and mortality is enormous, and many other factors should be considered, including gender and cultural habits in different countries.