Daily oxygenation support for patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in an integrated health system.

Background: Many studies of novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) are constructed to report hospitalization outcomes, with few large multi-center population-based reports on the time course of intra-hospitalization characteristics, including daily oxygenation support requirements. Comprehensive epidemiologic profiles of oxygenation methods used by day and by week during hospitalization across all severities are important to illustrate the clinical and economic burden of COVID-19 hospitalizations.Methods: This is a retrospective, multicenter observational cohort study of 15,361 consecutive hospitalizations of patients with COVID-19 at 25 adult acute care hospitals in Texas participating in the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) COVID-19 registryResults: At initial hospitalization, the majority required nasal cannula (44.0%) with increasing proportion of invasive mechanical ventilation in the first week and particularly the weeks to follow. After four weeks of acute illness, 69.9% of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 required intermediate (e.g., high-flow nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation) or advanced respiratory support (e.g., invasive mechanical ventilation), with similar proportions extending to hospitalizations lasting 6 weeks or longer.Conclusions: Data representation of intra-hospital processes of care drawn from hospitals with varied size, teaching and trauma designations is important to presenting a balanced perspective of care delivery mechanisms employed, such as daily oxygen method utilization.

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.

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.

Arrhythmias and Intraventricular Conduction Disturbances in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Cardiac arrhythmias have been observed in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Most analyses of rhythm disturbances to date include cases of sinus tachycardia, which may not accurately reflect true cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, limited data exist regarding the development of conduction disturbances in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Hence, we performed a retrospective review and compared characteristics and outcomes for patients with versus without incident arrhythmia, excluding sinus tachycardia, as well as between those with versus without incident conduction disturbances. There were 27 of 173 patients (16%) hospitalized with COVID-19 who developed a new arrhythmia. Incident arrhythmias were associated with an increased risk of intensive care unit admission (59% vs 31%, p = 0.0045), intubation (56% vs 20%, p <0.0001), and inpatient death (41% vs 10%, p = 0.0002) without an associated increase in risk of decompensated heart failure or other cardiac issues. New conduction disturbances were found in 13 patients (8%). Incident arrhythmias in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are associated with an increased risk of mortality, likely reflective of underlying COVID-19 disease severity more than intrinsic cardiac dysfunction. Conduction disturbances occurred less commonly and were not associated with adverse patient outcomes.

Six-Month Outcomes for COVID-19 Negative Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Before Versus During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the way patients seek medical attention and how medical services are provided. We sought to compare characteristics, clinical course, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the pandemic compared with before it. This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of consecutive COVID-19 negative patients with AMI in Lithuania from March 11, 2020 to April 20, 2020 compared with patients admitted with the same diagnosis during the same period in 2019. All patients underwent angiography. Six-month follow-up was obtained for all patients. A total of 269 patients were included in this study, 107 (40.8%) of whom presented during the pandemic. Median pain-to-door times were significantly longer (858 [quartile 1=360, quartile 3 = 2,600] vs 385.5 [200, 745] minutes, p <0.0001) and post-revascularization ejection fractions were significantly lower (35 [30, 45] vs 45 [40, 50], p <0.0001) for patients presenting during vs. prior to the pandemic. While the in-hospital mortality rate did not differ, we observed a higher rate of six-month major adverse cardiovascular events for patients who presented during versus prior to the pandemic (30.8% vs 13.6%, p = 0.0006). In conclusion, 34% fewer patients with AMI presented to the hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, and those who did waited longer to present and experienced more 6-month major adverse cardiovascular events compared with patients admitted before the pandemic.

Role of endothelial cell receptors in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19).

Endothelial cell (EC) dysfunction contributes to COVID-19-associated vascular inflammation and coagulopathy, and the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor plays a role in EC dysfunction in COVID-19. To expand the understanding of the role of the ACE2 receptor relative to EC dysfunction, this review addresses (1) tissue distribution of the ACE2 protein and its mRNA expression in humans, (2) susceptibility of the capillary ECs to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (3) the role of EC dysfunction relevant to ACE2 and nuclear factor-κB in COVID-19.

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.

Delays in Presentation in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has had a major impact on the behavior of patients, as well as on the delivery of healthcare services. With older and more medically vulnerable people tending to stay at home to avoid contracting the virus, it is unclear how the behavior of people with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has changed. The aim of this study was to determine if delays in presentation and healthcare service delivery for AMI exist during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period a year prior. METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective study, we evaluated patients admitted with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) during early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 11, 2020 to April 20, 2020) compared to patients admitted with same diagnosis during the same period a year prior. RESULTS: There were 30 and 62 patients who presented with NSTEMI in the pandemic and pre-pandemic eras, respectively. The median pain-to-door time was significantly larger during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic era (1,885 (880, 5,732) vs. 606 (388, 944) min, P < 0.0001). There was a significant delay in door-to-reperfusion time during the pandemic with a median time of 332 (182, 581) vs. 194 (92, 329) min (P = 0.0371). There were 24 (80%) and 25 (42%) patients who presented after 12 h of pain onset in pandemic and pre-pandemic eras, respectively (P = 0.0006). There were 47 and 60 patients who presented with STEMI during the pandemic timeframe of study and pre-pandemic timeframe, respectively. The median pain-to-door time during the pandemic was significantly larger than that of the pre-pandemic (620 (255, 1,500) vs. 349 (146, 659) min, P = 0.0141). There were 22 (47%) and 14 (24%) patients who presented after 12 h of pain onset in the pandemic and pre-pandemic eras, respectively (P = 0.0127). There was not a significant delay in door-to-reperfusion time (P = 0.9833). There were no differences in in-hospital death, stroke, or length of hospitalization between early and late presenters, as well as between pandemic and pre-pandemic eras. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this study found that patients waited significantly longer during the pandemic to seek medical treatment for AMI compared to before the pandemic, and that pandemic-specific protocols may delay revascularization for NSTEMI patients. These findings resulted in more than a threefold increase from the onset of symptoms to revascularization increasing the risks for future complications such as left ventricular dysfunction and cardiovascular death. Efforts should be made to increase patients' awareness regarding consequences of delayed presentation, and to find a balance between hospital evaluation strategies and goals of minimizing total ischemic time.

Vitamin D deficiency in association with endothelial dysfunction: Implications for patients with COVID-19.

There is emerging evidence to suggest that vitamin D deficiency is associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Conversely, vitamin D supplementation protects against an initial alveolar diffuse damage of COVID-19 becoming progressively worse. The mechanisms by which vitamin D deficiency exacerbates COVID-19 pneumonia remain poorly understood. In this review we describe the rationale of the putative role of endothelial dysfunction in this event. Herein, we will briefly review (1) anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic effects of vitamin D, (2) vitamin D receptor and vitamin D receptor ligand, (3) protective role of vitamin D against endothelial dysfunction, (4) risk of vitamin D deficiency, (5) vitamin D deficiency in association with endothelial dysfunction, (6) the characteristics of vitamin D relevant to COVID-19, (7) the role of vitamin D on innate and adaptive response, (8) biomarkers of endothelial cell activation contributing to cytokine storm, and (9) the bidirectional relationship between inflammation and homeostasis. Finally, we hypothesize that endothelial dysfunction relevant to vitamin D deficiency results from decreased binding of the vitamin D receptor with its ligand on the vascular endothelium and that it may be immune-mediated via increased interferon 1 α. A possible sequence of events may be described as (1) angiotensin II converting enzyme-related initial endothelial injury followed by vitamin D receptor-related endothelial dysfunction, (2) endothelial lesions deteriorating to endothelialitis, coagulopathy and thrombosis, and (3) vascular damage exacerbating pulmonary pathology and making patients with vitamin D deficiency vulnerable to death.

Endothelial dysfunction contributes to COVID-19-associated vascular inflammation and coagulopathy.

Great attention has been paid to endothelial dysfunction (ED) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There is growing evidence to suggest that the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor (ACE2 receptor) is expressed on endothelial cells (ECs) in the lung, heart, kidney, and intestine, particularly in systemic vessels (small and large arteries, veins, venules, and capillaries). Upon viral infection of ECs by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronarvirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), ECs become activated and dysfunctional. As a result of endothelial activation and ED, the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines (interleukin -1, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-α), chemokines (monocyte chemoattractant protein-1), von Willebrand factor (vWF) antigen, vWF activity, and factor VIII are elevated. Higher levels of acute phase reactants (IL-6, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer) are also associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that ED contributes to COVID-19-associated vascular inflammation, particularly endotheliitis, in the lung, heart, and kidney, as well as COVID-19-associated coagulopathy, particularly pulmonary fibrinous microthrombi in the alveolar capillaries. Here we present an update on ED-relevant vasculopathy in COVID-19. Further research for ED in COVID-19 patients is warranted to understand therapeutic opportunities.

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.

Ventricular Fibrillation Storm in Coronavirus 2019.

Cardiac arrhythmia is a known manifestation of novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Herein, we describe the clinical course of an otherwise healthy patient who experienced persistent ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation which is believed to be directly related to inflammation, as opposed to acute myocardial injury or medications that can prolong the QT interval.

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.

Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients Presenting With COVID-19 and ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

There is limited information regarding clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) disease presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In this multicenter retrospective study, we reviewed charts of patients admitted with symptomatic COVID-19 infection and STEMI to a total of 4 hospitals spanning Italy, Lithuania, Spain and Iraq from February 1, 2020 to April 15, 2020. A total of 78 patients were included in this study, 49 (63%) of whom were men, with a median age of 65 [58, 71] years, and high comorbidity burden. During hospitalization, 8 (10%) developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, and 14 (18%) required mechanical ventilation. 19 (24%) patients were treated with primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) and 59 (76%) were treated with fibrinolytic therapy. 13 (17%) patients required cardiac resuscitation, and 9 (11%) died. For the 19 patients treated with primary PCI, 8 (42%) required intubation and 8 (42%) required cardiac resuscitation; stent thrombosis occurred in 4 patients (21%). A total of 5 patients (26%) died during hospitalization. 50 (85%) of the 59 patients initially treated with fibrinolytic therapy had successful fibrinolysis. The median time to reperfusion was 27 minutes [20, 34]. Hemorrhagic stroke occurred in 5 patients (9%). Six patients (10%) required invasive mechanical ventilation; 5 (9%) required cardiac resuscitation, and 4 (7%) died. In conclusion, this is the largest case series to-date of COVID-19 positive patients presenting with STEMI and spans 4 countries. We found a high rate of stent thrombosis, indicating a possible need to adapt STEMI management for COVID-19 patients.