Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 23(1): 78, 2023 02 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2238645

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) is a frequent complication caused by cardiac and non-cardiac pathophysiological mechanisms, but often it is subclinical. MINS is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, justifying the need to its diagnose and the investigation of their causes for its potential prevention. METHODS: Prospective, observational, pilot study, aiming to detect MINS, its relationship with silent coronary artery disease and its effect on future adverse outcomes in patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery and without postoperative signs or symptoms of myocardial ischemia. MINS was defined by a high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) concentration > 14 ng/L at 48-72 h after surgery and exceeding by 50% the preoperative value; controls were the operated patients without MINS. Within 1-month after discharge, cardiac computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were performed in MINS and control subjects. Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) was defined by a CAD-RADS category ≥ 3. The primary outcomes were prevalence of CAD among MINS and controls and incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACE) at 1-year after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of individual MACE components and mortality. RESULTS: We included 52 MINS and 12 controls. The small number of included patients could be attributed to the study design complexity and the dates of later follow-ups (amid COVID-19 waves). Significant CAD by CCTA was equally found in 20 MINS and controls (30% vs 33%, respectively). Ischemic patterns (n = 5) and ischemic segments (n = 2) depicted by cardiac MRI were only observed in patients with MINS. One-year MACE were also only observed in MINS patients (15.4%). CONCLUSION: This study with advanced imaging methods found a similar CAD frequency in MINS and control patients, but that cardiac ischemic findings by MRI and worse prognosis were only observed in MINS patients. Our results, obtained in a pilot study, suggest the need of further, extended studies that screened systematically MINS and evaluated its relationship with cardiac ischemia and poor outcomes. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03438448 (19/02/2018).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronary Artery Disease , Heart Injuries , Myocardial Ischemia , Humans , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/surgery , Coronary Artery Disease/complications , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , COVID-19/complications , Myocardial Ischemia/diagnosis , Postoperative Complications/diagnostic imaging , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Risk Factors
3.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 827212, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1952271

ABSTRACT

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the decline in urgent cardiovascular hospital admissions and in-hospital mortality during the COVID pandemic in two successive waves, and to evaluate differences by sex, age, and deprivation index subgroups. Methods and Results: We obtained acute cardiovascular hospital episodes during the years 2019-2020 from region-wide data on public healthcare usage for the population of Catalonia (North-East Spain). We fitted time models to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and acute heart failure (HF) admissions during the first pandemic wave, the between-waves period, and the second wave compared with the corresponding pre-COVID-19 periods and to test for the interaction with sex, age, and area-based socioeconomic level. We evaluated the effect of COVID-19 period on in-hospital mortality. ACS (n = 8,636) and HF (n = 27,566) episodes were defined using primary diagnostic ICD-10 codes. ACS and HF admissions decreased during the first wave (IRR = 0.66, 95%CI: 0.58-0.76 and IRR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55-0.68, respectively) and during the second wave (IRR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.72-0.88 and IRR = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.69-0.84, respectively); acute HF admissions also decreased in the period between waves (IRR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.74-0.89). The impact was similar in all sex and socioeconomic subgroups and was higher in older patients with ACS. In-hospital mortality was higher than expected only during the first wave. Conclusion: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a marked decline in urgent cardiovascular hospital admissions that were attenuated during the second wave. Both the decline and the attenuation of the effect have been similar in all subgroups regardless of age, sex, or socioeconomic status. In-hospital mortality for ACS and HF episodes increased during the first wave, but not during the second wave.

4.
Clin Kidney J ; 15(1): 79-94, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1626703

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The effect of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade either by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility, mortality and severity is inadequately described. We examined the association between RAS blockade and COVID-19 diagnosis and prognosis in a large population-based cohort of patients with hypertension (HTN). METHODS: This is a cohort study using regional health records. We identified all individuals aged 18-95 years from 87 healthcare reference areas of the main health provider in Catalonia (Spain), with a history of HTN from primary care records. Data were linked to COVID-19 test results, hospital, pharmacy and mortality records from 1 March 2020 to 14 August 2020. We defined exposure to RAS blockers as the dispensation of ACEi/ARBs during the 3 months before COVID-19 diagnosis or 1 March 2020. Primary outcomes were: COVID-19 infection and severe progression in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (the composite of need for invasive respiratory support or death). For both outcomes and for each exposure of interest (RAS blockade, ACEi or ARB) we estimated associations in age-, sex-, healthcare area- and propensity score-matched samples. RESULTS: From a cohort of 1 365 215 inhabitants we identified 305 972 patients with HTN history. Recent use of ACEi/ARBs in patients with HTN was associated with a lower 6-month cumulative incidence of COVID-19 diagnosis {3.78% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.69-3.86%] versus 4.53% (95% CI 4.40-4.65%); P < 0.001}. In the 12 344 patients with COVID-19 infection, the use of ACEi/ARBs was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalization with need for invasive respiratory support or death [OR = 0.91 (0.71-1.15); P = 0.426]. CONCLUSIONS: RAS blockade in patients with HTN is not associated with higher risk of COVID-19 infection or with a worse progression of the disease.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL