Myocardial injury after major non-cardiac surgery evaluated with advanced cardiac imaging: a pilot study.

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).

COVID-19 in heart transplant recipients during February-August 2020: A systematic review.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic represents a major concern in immunosuppressed patients such as heart transplant recipients. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to summarize the clinical features, treatment, and outcomes of heart transplant recipients with COVID-19. We searched electronic databases from inception to January 11, 2021. Thirty-nine articles (22 case reports and 17 cohorts) involving 415 patients were included. The mean age was 59.9 ± 15.7 years and 77% of patients were men. In cohort studies including outpatients and inpatients, the hospitalization rate was 77%. The most common symptoms were fever (70%) and cough (67%). Inflammatory biomarkers (C-reactive protein and procalcitonin) were above the normal range. Forty-eight percent of patients presented with severe or critical COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine (54%), azithromycin (14%), and lopinavir/ritonavir (14%) were the most commonly used drugs. Forty-nine percent of patients discontinued the baseline regimen of antimetabolites. In contrast, 59% and 73% continued the same regimen of calcineurin inhibitors and corticosteroids, respectively. Short-term mortality among cohorts limited to inpatients was 25%. Our review suggests that heart transplant recipients with COVID-19 exhibited similar demographic and clinical features to the general population. However, the prognosis was poor in these patients.

Statin Use and In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and COVID-19.

Background Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by a proinflammatory state with high mortality. Statins have anti-inflammatory effects and may attenuate the severity of COVID-19. Methods and Results An observational study of all consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to a single center located in Bronx, New York, was conducted from March 1, 2020, to May 2, 2020. Patients were grouped as those who did and those who did not receive a statin, and in-hospital mortality was compared by competing events regression. In addition, propensity score matching and inverse probability treatment weighting were used in survival models to examine the association between statin use and death during hospitalization. A total of 4252 patients were admitted with COVID-19. Diabetes mellitus modified the association between statin use and in-hospital mortality. Patients with diabetes mellitus on a statin (n=983) were older (69±11 versus 67±14 years; P<0.01), had lower inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, 10.2; interquartile range, 4.5-18.4 versus 12.9; interquartile range, 5.9-21.4 mg/dL; P<0.01) and reduced cumulative in-hospital mortality (24% versus 39%; P<0.01) than those not on a statin (n=1283). No difference in hospital mortality was noted in patients without diabetes mellitus on or off statin (20% versus 21%; P=0.82). Propensity score matching (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83-0.94; P<0.01) and inverse probability treatment weighting (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.84-0.92; P<0.01) showed a 12% lower risk of death during hospitalization for statin users than for nonusers. Conclusions Statin use was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality from COVID-19 in patients with diabetes mellitus. These findings, if validated, may further reemphasize administration of statins to patients with diabetes mellitus during the COVID-19 era.

Prognostic Impact of Prior Heart Failure in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pre-existing heart failure (HF) are likely at higher risk for adverse outcomes in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but data on this population are sparse. OBJECTIVES: This study described the clinical profile and associated outcomes among patients with HF hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This study conducted a retrospective analysis of 6,439 patients admitted for COVID-19 at 1 of 5 Mount Sinai Health System hospitals in New York City between February 27 and June 26, 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes (length of stay, need for intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality) were captured from electronic health records. For patients identified as having a history of HF by International Classification of Diseases-9th and/or 10th Revisions codes, manual chart abstraction informed etiology, functional class, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). RESULTS: Mean age was 63.5 years, and 45% were women. Compared with patients without HF, those with previous HF experienced longer length of stay (8 days vs. 6 days; p < 0.001), increased risk of mechanical ventilation (22.8% vs. 11.9%; adjusted odds ratio: 3.64; 95% confidence interval: 2.56 to 5.16; p < 0.001), and mortality (40.0% vs. 24.9%; adjusted odds ratio: 1.88; 95% confidence interval: 1.27 to 2.78; p = 0.002). Outcomes among patients with HF were similar, regardless of LVEF or renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitor use. CONCLUSIONS: History of HF was associated with higher risk of mechanical ventilation and mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, regardless of LVEF.

Lung ultrasound for the identification of COVID-19 pneumonia.

The SARS-CoV-2 infection has as a clinical manifestation the disease known as COVID-19. Although knowledge of the nature of the disease is dynamic, with dozens of scientific articles being published every day about new features of COVID-19, the typical presentation is that of interstitial pneumonia. Despite the large amount of information that has been developed in recent weeks, it has been estimated that this disease can have up to 72% underdiagnosis, which requires clinical tools that are simple, easily accessible, and increase the detection of cases in a feasible way and that yield information with prognostic value. Given this need, some proposals have emerged to be able to diagnose, monitor and respond to the treatment of patients with COVID-19, such as pulmonary ultrasound (USP). It is worth mentioning that the USP has proven to be an efficient and easily reproducible technique for diagnosing heart failure and pleuro-pulmonary pathologies, especially in critically ill patients. Evidence of the usefulness of USP in COVID-19 is still scarce, although preliminary, it seems to be a sensitive technique whose findings have a high gold standard. In this brief review we will emphasize its technical aspects, the advantages and disadvantages, and finally a proposal for the approach in this type of patient.

La infección por SARS-CoV-2 tiene como manifestación clínica la enfermedad conocida como COVID-19. Si bien el conocimiento de la naturaleza de la enfermedad es dinámico, publicándose cada día decenas de artículos científicos sobre nuevas características de COVID-19, la presentación típica es la de neumonía intersticial. A pesar de la gran cantidad de información que se ha desarrollado en las últimas semanas, se ha estimado que esta enfermedad puede llegar a tener hasta un 72% de infradiagnóstico, por lo que se requieren herramientas clínicas que sean simples, de fácil acceso, que incrementen la detección de casos de forma factible y que arrojen información con valor pronóstico. Ante esta necesidad, han surgido algunas propuestas para poder realizar el diagnóstico, seguimiento y respuesta al tratamiento de los pacientes con COVID-19, tales como el ultrasonido pulmonar (USP). Cabe mencionar que el USP ha probado ser una técnica eficiente y de fácil reproducibilidad para diagnosticar insuficiencia cardiaca y patologías pleuro-pulmonares, sobre todo en pacientes críticamente enfermos. La evidencia de la utilidad de USP en COVID-19 es aún escasa, aunque de forma preliminar, parece ser una técnica sensible cuyos hallazgos tienen una elevada gold-standard. En esta breve revisión haremos énfasis en sus aspectos técnicos, las ventajas y desventajas, y por último una propuesta para el abordaje en este tipo de pacientes.