Acute COVID-19 Management in Heart Failure Patients: A Specific Setting Requiring Detailed Inpatient and Outpatient Hospital Care.

The relationship existing between heart failure (HF) and COVID-19 remains questioned and poorly elucidated. Many reports suggest that HF events are reduced during pandemics, although other studies have demonstrated higher mortality and sudden death in patients affected by HF. Several vascular, thrombotic, and respiratory features may deteriorate stable HF patients; therefore, the infection may directly cause direct myocardial damage, leading to cardiac function deterioration. Another concern is related to the possibility that antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and corticosteroid agents commonly employed during acute COVID-19 infection may have potentially deleterious effects on the cardiovascular (CV) system. For these reasons, HF patients deserve specific management with a tailored approach in order to avoid arrhythmic complications and fluid retention events. In this review, we describe the complex interplay between COVID-19 and HF, the evolving trend of infection with related CV events, and the specific management strategy to adopt in this setting.

Antecedent Administration of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists and Survival After Hospitalization for COVID-19 Syndrome.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) utilizes the angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE-2) receptor to enter human cells. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARB) are associated with ACE-2 upregulation. We hypothesized that antecedent use of ACEI/ARB may be associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods and Results We used the Coracle registry, which contains data of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 4 regions of Italy, and restricted analyses to those ≥50 years of age. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Among these 781 patients, 133 (17.0%) used an ARB and 171 (21.9%) used an ACEI. While neither sex nor smoking status differed by user groups, patients on ACEI/ARB were older and more likely to have hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure. The overall mortality rate was 15.1% (118/781) and increased with age (PTrend<0.0001). The crude odds ratios (ORs) for death for ACEI users and ARB users were 0.98, 95% CI, 0.60-1.60, P=0.9333, and 1.13, 95% CI, 0.67-1.91, P=0.6385, respectively. After adjusting for age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and congestive heart failure, antecedent ACEI administration was associated with reduced mortality (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-0.98, P=0.0436); a similar, but weaker trend was observed for ARB administration (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.32-1.07, P=0.0796). Conclusions In those aged ≥50 years hospitalized with COVID-19, antecedent use of ACEI was independently associated with reduced risk of inpatient death. Our findings suggest a protective role of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition in patients with high cardiovascular risk affected by COVID-19.

Heart failure during the COVID-19 pandemic: clinical, diagnostic, management, and organizational dilemmas.

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection pandemic has affected the care of patients with heart failure (HF). Several consensus documents describe the appropriate diagnostic algorithm and treatment approach for patients with HF and associated COVID-19 infection. However, few questions about the mechanisms by which COVID can exacerbate HF in patients with high-risk (Stage B) or symptomatic HF (Stage C) remain unanswered. Therefore, the type of HF occurring during infection is poorly investigated. The diagnostic differentiation and management should be focused on the identification of the HF phenotype, underlying causes, and subsequent tailored therapy. In this framework, the relationship existing between COVID and onset of acute decompensated HF, isolated right HF, and cardiogenic shock is questioned, and the specific management is mainly based on local hospital organization rather than a standardized model. Similarly, some specific populations such as advanced HF, heart transplant, patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or valve disease remain under investigated. In this systematic review, we examine recent advances regarding the relationships between HF and COVID-19 pandemic with respect to epidemiology, pathogenetic mechanisms, and differential diagnosis. Also, according to the recent HF guidelines definition, we highlight different clinical profile identification, pointing out the main concerns in understudied HF populations.

Inpatient Mortality According to Level of Respiratory Support Received for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) Infection: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe patients according to the maximum degree of respiratory support received and report their inpatient mortality due to coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Analysis of patients in the Coracle registry from February 22, 2020, to April 1, 2020. SETTING: Hospitals in the Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, and Lazio regions of Italy. PATIENTS: Nine-hundred forty-eight patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 948 patients, 122 (12.87%) received invasive ventilation, 637 (67.19%) received supplemental oxygen only, and 189 (19.94%) received no respiratory support. The median (quartile 1-quartile 3) age was 65 years (54-76.59 yr), and there was evidence of differential respiratory treatment by decade of life (p = 0.0046); patients greater than 80 years old were generally not intubated. There were 606 men (63.9%) in this study, and they were more likely to receive respiratory support than women (p < 0.0001). The rate of in-hospital death for invasive ventilation recipients was 22.95%, 12.87% for supplemental oxygen recipients, and 7.41% for those who received neither (p = 0.0004). A sensitivity analysis of the 770 patients less than 80 years old revealed a lower, but similar mortality trend (18.02%, 8.10%, 5.23%; p = 0.0008) among the 14.42%, 65.71%, and 19.87% of patients treated with mechanical ventilation, supplemental oxygen only, or neither. Overall, invasive ventilation recipients who died were significantly older than those who survived (median age: 68.5 yr [60-81.36 yr] vs 62.5 yr [55.52-71 yr]; p = 0.0145). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019, 13% received mechanical ventilation, which was associated with a mortality rate of 23%.

Usefulness of Combined Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Diuretic Treatment In Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Antecedent use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) prevents clinical deterioration and protects against cardiovascular/thrombotic complications of COVID-19, for indicated patients. Uncertainty exists regarding treatment continuation throughout infection and doing so with concomitant medications. Hence, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the differential effect of RASi continuation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 according to diuretic use. We used the Coracle registry, which contains data of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from 4 regions of Italy. We used Firth logistic regression for adult (>50 years) cases with admission on/after February 22, 2020, with a known discharge status as of April 1, 2020. There were 286 patients in this analysis; 100 patients (35.0%) continued RASi and 186 (65%) discontinued. There were 98 patients treated with a diuretic; 51 (52%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 8% versus 26% (p = 0.0179). There were 188 patients not treated with a diuretic; 49 (26%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients not treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 16% versus 9% (p = 0.1827). After accounting for age, cardiovascular disease, and laboratory values, continuing RASi decreased the risk of mortality by approximately 77% (odds ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.95, p = 0.0419) for patients treated with diuretics, but did not alter the risk in patients treated with RASi alone. Continuing RASi in patients concomitantly treated with diuretics was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.

Usefulness of Combined Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors and Diuretic Treatment In Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19

Antecedent use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) prevents clinical deterioration and protects against cardiovascular/thrombotic complications of COVID-19, for indicated patients. Uncertainty exists regarding treatment continuation throughout infection and doing so with concomitant medications. Hence, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the differential effect of RASi continuation in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 according to diuretic use. We used the Coracle registry, which contains data of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from 4 regions of Italy. We used Firth logistic regression for adult (>50 years) cases with admission on/after February 22, 2020, with a known discharge status as of April 1, 2020. There were 286 patients in this analysis;100 patients (35.0%) continued RASi and 186 (65%) discontinued. There were 98 patients treated with a diuretic;51 (52%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 8% versus 26% (p = 0.0179). There were 188 patients not treated with a diuretic;49 (26%) of those continued RASi. The in-hospital mortality rates in patients not treated with a diuretic and continued versus discontinued RASi were 16% versus 9% (p = 0.1827). After accounting for age, cardiovascular disease, and laboratory values, continuing RASi decreased the risk of mortality by approximately 77% (odds ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.95, p = 0.0419) for patients treated with diuretics, but did not alter the risk in patients treated with RASi alone. Continuing RASi in patients concomitantly treated with diuretics was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.

The relevance of specific heart failure outpatient programs in the COVID era: an appropriate model for every disease.

Heart Failure (HF) is characterized by an elevated readmission rate, with almost 50% of events occurring after the first episode over the first 6 months of the post-discharge period. In this context, the vulnerable phase represents the period when patients elapse from a sub-acute to a more stabilized chronic phase. The lack of an accurate approach for each HF subtype is probably the main cause of the inconclusive data in reducing the trend of recurrent hospitalizations. Most care programs are based on the main diagnosis and the HF stages, but a model focused on the specific HF etiology is lacking. The HF clinic route based on the HF etiology and the underlying diseases responsible for HF could become an interesting approach, compared with the traditional programs, mainly based on non-specific HF subtypes and New York Heart Association class, rather than on detailed etiologic and epidemiological data. This type of care may reduce the 30-day readmission rates for HF, increase the use of evidence-based therapies, prevent the exacerbation of each comorbidity, improve patient compliance, and decrease the use of resources. For all these reasons, we propose a dedicated outpatient HF program with a daily practice scenario that could improve the early identification of symptom progression and the quality-of-life evaluation, facilitate the access to diagnostic and laboratory tools and improve the utilization of financial resources, together with optimal medical titration and management.

Screening, detection, and management of heart failure in the SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Observational studies suggest that a heart failure (HF) diagnosis carries a poor prognosis in subjects with severe SARS-CoV2 (COVID-19) infection, but it is unknown whether this association reflects direct myocardial damage due to COVID-19 or the consequence of preexisting cardiac defects and related cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk burden. Although the close relation between CVD and COVID-19 outcomes is well established, contrasting data exists about the occurrence of HF complications during COVID-19 infection. Therefore, a specific algorithm focused on diagnostic differentiation in acute patients distinguishing between acute HF and acute respiratory distress syndrome related to COVID-19 is needed. Further, several concerns exist for the management of patients with an uncertain diagnosis and acute dyspnea, the exact relationship existing between COVID-19 and HF. Therefore, the treatment for subjects with both COVID-19 and HF and which criteria may be defined for domiciliary or hospital management, remain poorly defined. Herein, we describe practices to be adopted in order to address these concerns and avoid further virus spread among patients, l and their familiars involved in such patients' care.

Reduction in heart failure hospitalization rate during coronavirus disease 19 pandemic outbreak.

AIMS: The recent coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak forced the adoption of restraint measures, which modified the hospital admission patterns for several diseases. The aim of the study is to investigate the rate of hospital admissions for heart failure (HF) during the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy, compared with a corresponding period during the previous year and an earlier period during the same year. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective analysis on HF admissions number at eight hospitals in Italy throughout the study period (21 February to 31 March 2020), compared with an inter-year period (21 February to 31 March 2019) and an intra-year period (1 January to 20 February 2020). The primary outcome was the overall rate of hospital admissions for HF. A total of 505 HF patients were included in this survey: 112 during the case period, 201 during intra-year period, and 192 during inter-year period. The mean admission rate during the case period was 2.80 admissions per day, significantly lower compared with intra-year period (3.94 admissions per day; incidence rate ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.89; P = 0.0037), or with inter-year (4.92 admissions per day; incidence rate ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.72; P < 0.001). Patients admitted during study period were less frequently admitted in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II compared with inter-year period (P = 0.019). At covariance analysis NYHA class was significantly lower in patients admitted during inter-year control period, compared with patients admitted during case period (P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Admissions for HF were significantly reduced during the lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy.

Acute Coronary Syndromes and Covid-19: Exploring the Uncertainties.

Since an association between myocardial infarction (MI) and respiratory infections has been described for influenza viruses and other respiratory viral agents, understanding possible physiopathological links between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is of the greatest importance. The initial data suggest an underestimation of ACS cases all over the world, but acute MI still represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and should not be overshadowed during the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) pandemic. No common consensus regarding the most adequate healthcare management policy for ACS is currently available. Indeed, important differences have been reported between the measures employed to treat ACS in China during the first disease outbreak and what currently represents clinical practice across Europe and the USA. This review aims to discuss the pathophysiological links between MI, respiratory infections, and Covid-19; epidemiological data related to ACS at the time of the Covid-19 pandemic; and learnings that have emerged so far from several catheterization labs and coronary care units all over the world, in order to shed some light on the current strategies for optimal management of ACS patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Mortality Risk Assessment Using CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc Scores in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection.

Early risk stratification for complications and death related to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is needed. Because many patients with COVID-19 who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome have diffuse alveolar inflammatory damage associated with microvessel thrombosis, we aimed to investigate a common clinical tool, the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc, to aid in the prognostication of outcomes for COVID-19 patients. We analyzed consecutive patients from the multicenter observational CORACLE registry, which contains data of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection in 4 regions of Italy, according to data-driven tertiles of CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score. The primary outcomes were inpatient death and a composite of inpatient death or invasive ventilation. Of 1045 patients in the registry, 864 (82.7%) had data available to calculate CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score and were included in the analysis. Of these, 167 (19.3%) died, 123 (14.2%) received invasive ventilation, and 249 (28.8%) had the composite outcome. Stratification by CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc tertiles (T1: ≤1; T2: 2 to 3; T3: ≥4) revealed increases in both death (8.1%, 24.3%, 33.3%, respectively; p <0.001) and the composite end point (18.6%, 31.9%, 43.5%, respectively; p <0.001). The odds ratios for mortality and the composite end point for T2 patients versus T1 CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score were 3.62 (95% CI:2.29 to 5.73,p <0.001) and 2.04 (95% CI:1.42 to 2.93, p <0.001), respectively. Similarly, the odds ratios for mortality and the composite end point for T3 patients versus T1 were 5.65 (95% CI:3.54 to 9.01, p <0.001) and 3.36 (95% CI:2.30 to 4.90,p <0.001), respectively. In conclusion, among Italian patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection, the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc risk score for thromboembolic events enhanced the ability to achieve risk stratification for complications and death.

Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Infection.

Approximately 9 months of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavius-2 (SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19]) spreading across the globe has led to widespread COVID-19 acute hospitalizations and death. The rapidity and highly communicable nature of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak has hampered the design and execution of definitive randomized, controlled trials of therapy outside of the clinic or hospital. In the absence of clinical trial results, physicians must use what has been learned about the pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection in determining early outpatient treatment of the illness with the aim of preventing hospitalization or death. This article outlines key pathophysiological principles that relate to the patient with early infection treated at home. Therapeutic approaches based on these principles include 1) reduction of reinoculation, 2) combination antiviral therapy, 3) immunomodulation, 4) antiplatelet/antithrombotic therapy, and 5) administration of oxygen, monitoring, and telemedicine. Future randomized trials testing the principles and agents discussed will undoubtedly refine and clarify their individual roles; however, we emphasize the immediate need for management guidance in the setting of widespread hospital resource consumption, morbidity, and mortality.

Hypertension prevalence in human coronavirus disease: the role of ACE system in infection spread and severity.

The prevalence of hypertension is high in patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) and it appears to be related to an increased risk of mortality, as shown in many epidemiological studies. The angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) system is not uniformly expressed in all of the human races, and current differences could explain some of the geographical discrepancies in infection around the world. Furthermore, animal studies have shown that the ACE2 receptor is a potential pathway for host infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19. As two-thirds of hypertensive patients take ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, several concerns have been raised about the detrimental role of current antihypertensive drugs in COVID-19. This report summarizes the recent evidence for and against the administration of ACE blockade in the COVID-19 era.

Urgent need for individual mobile phone and institutional reporting of at home, hospitalized, and intensive care unit cases of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection.

Approximately 90 days of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) spreading originally from Wuhan, China, and across the globe has led to a widespread chain of events with imminent threats to the fragile relationship between community health and economic health. Despite near hourly reporting on this crisis, there has been no regular, updated, or accurate reporting of hospitalizations for COVID-19. It is known that many test-positive individuals may not develop symptoms or have a mild self-limited viral syndrome consisting of fever, malaise, dry cough, and constitutional symptoms. However some individuals develop a more fulminant syndrome including viral pneumonia, respiratory failure requiring oxygen, acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation, and in substantial fractions leading to death attributable to COVID-19. The pandemic is evolving in a clustered, non-inform fashion resulting in many hospitals with preparedness but few or no cases, and others that are completely overwhelmed. Thus, a considerable risk of spread when personal protection equipment becomes exhausted and a large fraction of mortality in those not offered mechanical ventilation are both attributable to a crisis due to maldistribution of resources. The pandemic is amenable to self-reporting through a mobile phone application that could obtain critical information on suspected cases and report on the results of self testing and actions taken. The only method to understand the clustering and the immediate hospital resource needs is mandatory, uniform, daily reporting of hospital censuses of COVID-19 cases admitted to hospital wards and intensive care units. Current reports of hospitalizations are delayed, uncertain, and wholly inadequate. This paper urges all the relevant stakeholders to take up self-reporting and reporting of hospitalizations of COVID-19 as an urgent task in combating this devastating pandemic.