Clinical Profile and Determinants of Mortality in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease Admitted for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome and diabetes mellitus: a propensity-matched analysis of the International HOPE-II COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most frequent comorbidities in patients suffering from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with a higher rate of severe course of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, data about post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) in patients with DM are limited. Methods: This multicenter, propensity score-matched study compared long-term follow-up data about cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric, respiratory, gastrointestinal, and other symptoms in 8,719 patients with DM to those without DM. The 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) according to age and sex resulted in 1,548 matched pairs. Results: Diabetics and nondiabetics had a mean age of 72.6 ± 12.7 years old. At follow-up, cardiovascular symptoms such as dyspnea and increased resting heart rate occurred less in patients with DM (13.2% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.01) than those without DM (2.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.05), respectively. The incidence of newly diagnosed arterial hypertension was slightly lower in DM patients as compared to non-DM patients (0.5% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.18). Abnormal spirometry was observed more in patients with DM than those without DM (18.8% vs. 13; p = 0.24). Paranoia was diagnosed more frequently in patients with DM than in non-DM patients at follow-up time (4% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.009). The incidence of newly diagnosed renal insufficiency was higher in patients suffering from DM as compared to patients without DM (4.8% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.09). The rate of readmission was comparable in patients with and without DM (19.7% vs. 18.3%; p = 0.61). The reinfection rate with COVID-19 was comparable in both groups (2.9% in diabetics vs. 2.3% in nondiabetics; p = 0.55). Long-term mortality was higher in DM patients than in non-DM patients (33.9% vs. 29.1%; p = 0.005). Conclusions: The mortality rate was higher in patients with DM type II as compared to those without DM. Readmission and reinfection rates with COVID-19 were comparable in both groups. The incidence of cardiovascular symptoms was higher in patients without DM.

Fulminant myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination rescued with venoarterial ECMO: A report of two cases.

INTRODUCTION: Cases of myocarditis after COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines administration have been reported. Although the majority follow a mild course, fulminant presentations may occur. In these cases, cardiopulmonary support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) may be needed. RESULTS: We present two cases supported with V-A ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock due to myocarditis secondary to a mRNA SARS-CoV2 vaccine. One of the cases was admitted for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In both, a peripheral V-A ECMO was implanted in the cath lab using the Seldinger technique. An intra-aortic balloon pump was needed in one case for left ventricle unloading. Support could be successfully withdrawn in a mean of five days. No major bleeding or thrombosis complications occurred. Whereas an endomyocardial biopsy was performed in both, a definite microscopic diagnosis just could be reached in one of them. Treatment was the same, using 1000mg of methylprednisolone/day for three days. A cardiac magnetic resonance was performed ten days after admission, showing a significant improvement of the left ventricular ejection fraction and diffuse oedema and subepicardial contrast intake in different segments. Both cases were discharged fully recovered, with CPC 1. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine-associated fulminant myocarditis has a high morbidity and mortality but presents a high potential for recovery. V-A ECMO should be established in cases with refractory cardiogenic shock during the acute phase.

Myocarditis related SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination: an expert consensus statement on its diagnosis and management.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has revealed several cardiovascular complications, including myocarditis caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) or after messenger RNA vaccine administration. Because of the high prevalence of COVID-19, the expansion of vaccination programs, and the appearance of new information on myocarditis in these contexts, there is a need to condense the knowledge acquired since the start of the pandemic. To meet this need, this document was drafted by the Myocarditis Working Group of the Heart Failure Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, with the collaboration of the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS). The document aims to address the diagnosis and treatment of cases of myocarditis associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or messenger RNA vaccine administration.

Consenso de expertos sobre el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de la miocarditis asociada con infección o vacunación contra el SARS-CoV-2 Myocarditis related SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination: an expert consensus statement on its diagnosis and management

La pandemia causada por el coronavirus del síndrome respiratorio agudo grave de tipo 2 (SARS-CoV-2) ha puesto de manifiesto una serie de complicaciones cardiovasculares, entre las que destaca la miocarditis ocasionada tanto por la propia infección por SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) como por la administración de vacunas de ARN mensajero. La elevada prevalencia de primoinfección, la difusión universal de los programas de vacunación y la constante aparición de nueva información sobre la miocarditis en estos contextos, hace necesario condensar el conocimiento adquirido desde el inicio de la pandemia. Con este objetivo, el Grupo de Trabajo Miocarditis de la Asociación de Insuficiencia Cardiaca de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología, con la colaboración de la Agencia Española de Medicamentos y Productos Sanitarios (AEMPS), ha elaborado el presente documento que pretende abordar el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de los casos de miocarditis asociados con la infección por SARS-CoV-2 o la vacuna de ARN mensajero.

[Myocarditis related SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination: an expert consensus statement on its diagnosis and management]. / Consenso de expertos sobre el diagnóstico y el tratamiento de la miocarditis asociada con infección o vacunación contra el SARS-CoV-2.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has revealed several cardiovascular complications, including myocarditis caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) or after messenger RNA vaccine administration. Because of the high prevalence of COVID-19, the expansion of vaccination programs, and the appearance of new information on myocarditis in these contexts, there is a need to condense the knowledge acquired since the start of the pandemic. To meet this need, this document was drafted by the Myocarditis Working Group of the Heart Failure Association of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, with the collaboration of the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS). The document aims to address the diagnosis and treatment of cases of myocarditis associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or messenger RNA vaccine administration.

Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Heart Disease: Incidence, Prognostic Factors, Outcomes and Vaccination: Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE 2).

BACKGROUND: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81-3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04-0.19). CONCLUSIONS: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.

Aspirin Therapy on Prophylactic Anticoagulation for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis of the HOPE-COVID-19 Registry.

Background COVID-19 is an infectious illness, featured by an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, no standard antithrombotic therapy is currently recommended for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of additional therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. Methods and Results A total of 8168 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicenter-international prospective registry (HOPE COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. Study population included patients treated with PAC or with PAC and aspirin. A comparison of clinical outcomes between patients treated with PAC versus PAC and aspirin was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score matching. Of 7824 patients with complete data, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with PAC and aspirin versus PAC (15% versus 21%, Log Rank P=0.01). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of patients with COVID-19, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure, and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; [95% CI 0.42-0.92], P=0.018). Conclusions Combination PAC and aspirin was associated with lower mortality risk among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a propensity score matched population compared to PAC alone.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Gender Differences in Takotsubo Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Male sex in takotsubo syndrome (TTS) has a low incidence and it is still not well characterized. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study is to describe TTS sex differences. METHODS: TTS patients enrolled in the international multicenter GEIST (GErman Italian Spanish Takotsubo) registry were analyzed. Comparisons between sexes were performed within the overall cohort and using an adjusted analysis with 1:1 propensity score matching for age, comorbidities, and kind of trigger. RESULTS: In total, 286 (11%) of 2,492 TTS patients were men. Male patients were younger (age 69 ± 13 years vs 71 ± 11 years; P = 0.005), with higher prevalence of comorbid conditions (diabetes mellitus 25% vs 19%; P = 0.01; pulmonary diseases 21% vs 15%; P = 0.006; malignancies 25% vs 13%; P < 0.001) and physical trigger (55 vs 32% P < 0.01). Propensity-score matching yielded 207 patients from each group. After 1:1 propensity matching, male patients had higher rates of cardiogenic shock and in-hospital mortality (16% vs 6% and 8% vs 3%, respectively; both P < 0.05). Long-term mortality rate was 4.3% per patient-year (men 10%, women 3.8%). Survival analysis showed higher mortality rate in men during the acute phase in both cohorts (overall: P < 0.001; matched: P = 0.001); mortality rate after 60 days was higher in men in the overall (P = 0.002) but not in the matched cohort (P = 0.541). Within the overall population, male sex remained independently associated with both in-hospital (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.16-4.40) and long-term mortality (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.32-2.52). CONCLUSIONS: Male TTS is featured by a distinct high-risk phenotype requiring close in-hospital monitoring and long-term follow-up.

Prevalence, Characteristics, and Outcomes of COVID-19-Associated Acute Myocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocarditis (AM) is thought to be a rare cardiovascular complication of COVID-19, although minimal data are available beyond case reports. We aim to report the prevalence, baseline characteristics, in-hospital management, and outcomes for patients with COVID-19-associated AM on the basis of a retrospective cohort from 23 hospitals in the United States and Europe. METHODS: A total of 112 patients with suspected AM from 56 963 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were evaluated between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2021. Inclusion criteria were hospitalization for COVID-19 and a diagnosis of AM on the basis of endomyocardial biopsy or increased troponin level plus typical signs of AM on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. We identified 97 patients with possible AM, and among them, 54 patients with definite/probable AM supported by endomyocardial biopsy in 17 (31.5%) patients or magnetic resonance imaging in 50 (92.6%). We analyzed patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes among all COVID-19-associated AM. RESULTS: AM prevalence among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was 2.4 per 1000 hospitalizations considering definite/probable and 4.1 per 1000 considering also possible AM. The median age of definite/probable cases was 38 years, and 38.9% were female. On admission, chest pain and dyspnea were the most frequent symptoms (55.5% and 53.7%, respectively). Thirty-one cases (57.4%) occurred in the absence of COVID-19-associated pneumonia. Twenty-one (38.9%) had a fulminant presentation requiring inotropic support or temporary mechanical circulatory support. The composite of in-hospital mortality or temporary mechanical circulatory support occurred in 20.4%. At 120 days, estimated mortality was 6.6%, 15.1% in patients with associated pneumonia versus 0% in patients without pneumonia (P=0.044). During hospitalization, left ventricular ejection fraction, assessed by echocardiography, improved from a median of 40% on admission to 55% at discharge (n=47; P<0.0001) similarly in patients with or without pneumonia. Corticosteroids were frequently administered (55.5%). CONCLUSIONS: AM occurrence is estimated between 2.4 and 4.1 out of 1000 patients hospitalized for COVID-19. The majority of AM occurs in the absence of pneumonia and is often complicated by hemodynamic instability. AM is a rare complication in patients hospitalized for COVID-19, with an outcome that differs on the basis of the presence of concomitant pneumonia.

Chronic use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis Uso crónico de los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona en pacientes con COVID-19 e hipertensión arterial: Resultados de un registro español y metaanálisis

Background Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. Methods We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. Results Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (−0.151 [95% CI −0.218, −0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (−0.167 [95% CI −0.220, −0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [−0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224–0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42–0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. Conclusion Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Chronic use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients: Results from a Spanish registry and meta-analysis.

Background: Hypertension is a prevalent condition among SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. Whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors are beneficial or harmful is controversial. Methods: We have performed a national retrospective, nonexperimental comparative study from two tertiary hospitals to evaluate the impact of chronic use of RAAS inhibitors in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. A meta-analysis was performed to strengthen our findings. Results: Of 849 patients, 422 (49.7%) patients were hypertensive and 310 (73.5%) were taking RAAS inhibitors at baseline. Hypertensive patients were older, had more comorbidities, and a greater incidence of respiratory failure (-0.151 [95% CI -0.218, -0.084]). Overall mortality in hypertensive patients was 28.4%, but smaller among those with prescribed RAAS inhibitors before (-0.167 [95% CI -0.220, -0.114]) and during hospitalization (0.090 [-0.008,0.188]). Similar findings were observed after two propensity score matches that evaluated the benefit of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers among hypertensive patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of hypertensive patients found that age, diabetes mellitus, C-reactive protein, and renal failure were independently associated with all-cause mortality. On the contrary, ACEIs decreased the risk of death (OR 0.444 [95% CI 0.224-0.881]). Meta-analysis suggested a protective benefit of RAAS inhibitors (OR 0.6 [95% CI 0.42-0.8]) among hypertensive COVID-19. Conclusion: Our data suggest that RAAS inhibitors may play a protective role in hypertensive COVID-19 patients. This finding was supported by a meta-analysis of the current evidence. Maintaining these medications during hospital stay may not negatively affect COVID-19 outcomes.

Introducción: La hipertensión es una condición prevalente entre los pacientes infectados por el SARS-CoV-2. Es controvertido si los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona (SRAA) son beneficiosos o perjudiciales. Métodos: Hemos desarrollado un estudio comparativo nacional retrospectivo y no experimental en 2 hospitales terciarios para evaluar el impacto del uso crónico de inhibidores del SRAA en pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Se realizó un metaanálisis para reforzar los hallazgos. Resultados: De 849 pacientes, 422 (49,7%) eran hipertensos y 310 (73,5%) tomaban inhibidores del SRAA al inicio del estudio. Los pacientes hipertensos eran mayores, tenían más comorbilidades y una mayor incidencia de insuficiencia respiratoria (−0,151; IC 95%: [−0,218; −0,084]). La mortalidad global en los pacientes hipertensos fue del 28,4%, pero fue menor entre los que tenían prescritos inhibidores del SRAA antes (−0,167; IC 95%: [−0,220; −0,114]) y durante la hospitalización (0,090; [−0,008; 0,188]). Se observaron hallazgos similares tras 2 emparejamientos de puntuación de propensión que evaluaron el beneficio de los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina y los bloqueadores de los receptores de angiotensina entre los pacientes hipertensos. El análisis de regresión logística multivariante de los pacientes hipertensos reveló que la edad, la diabetes mellitus, la proteína C reactiva y la insuficiencia renal se asociaban de forma independiente con la mortalidad por todas las causas. Por el contrario, los inhibidores de la enzima convertidora de angiotensina disminuyeron el riesgo de muerte (OR 0,444; IC 95%: 0,224-0,881). El metaanálisis indicó un beneficio protector de los inhibidores del SRAA (OR 0,6; IC 95%: 0,42-0,8) entre los hipertensos con COVID-19. Conclusión: Nuestros datos indican que los inhibidores del SRAA pueden desempeñar un papel protector en los pacientes hipertensos con COVID-19. Este hallazgo fue apoyado por un metaanálisis de la evidencia actual. Su mantenimiento durante la estancia hospitalaria puede no afectar negativamente a los resultados de la COVID-19.

[Atrial fibrillation in patients with COVID-19. Usefulness of the CHA2DS2-VASc score: an analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 registry]. / Fibrilación auricular en pacientes con COVID-19. Utilidad de la puntuación CHA2DS2-VASc: un análisis del registro internacional HOPE COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations, where it is associated with more complications and higher mortality. METHODS: Analysis of the international HOPE registry (NCT04334291). The objective was to assess the prognostic information of AF in COVID-19 patients. A multivariate analysis and propensity score matching were performed to assess the relationship between AF and mortality. We also evaluated the impact on mortality and embolic events of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in these patients. RESULTS: Among 6217 patients enrolled in the HOPE registry, 250 had AF (4.5%). AF patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. After propensity score matching, these differences were attenuated. Despite this, patients with AF had a higher incidence of in-hospital complications such as heart failure (19.3% vs 11.6%, P = .021) and respiratory insufficiency (75.9% vs 62.3%, P = .002), as well as a higher 60-day mortality rate (43.4% vs 30.9%, P = .005). On multivariate analysis, AF was independently associated with higher 60-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.234; 95%CI, 1.003-1.519). CHA2DS2-VASc score acceptably predicts 60-day mortality in COVID-19 patients (area ROC, 0.748; 95%CI, 0.733-0.764), but not its embolic risk (area ROC, 0.411; 95%CI, 0.147-0.675). CONCLUSIONS: AF in COVID-19 patients is associated with a higher number of complications and 60-day mortality. The CHA2DS2-VASc score may be a good risk marker in COVID patients but does not predict their embolic risk.

Atrial fibrillation in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: the SARS-CoV-2 infection ranges from asymptomatic to critical forms and several prognostic factors have been described. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in acute situations where it is linked with more complications and mortality. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic information of AF in this population. METHODS: retrospective analysis of a cohort of 517 patients consecutively admitted in a tertiary hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We divided the patients in two groups according the development of AF and compared the main features of both groups. An univariable and multivariable analysis of mortality were also performed. RESULTS: among 517 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted in a tertiary center, 54 (10.4%) developed AF. These patients are older (81.6 vs 66.5 years old, p < 0.001) and present more hypertension (74% vs 47%, p < 0.001), cardiomyopathy (9% vs 1%, p = 0.002), previous heart failure admission (9% vs 0.4%, p < 0.001), previous episodes of AF (83% vs 1%, p < 0.001) and bigger left atrium (47.8 vs 39.9 mm, p < 0.001). AF COVID-19 patients present more acute respiratory failure (72% vs 40%, p < 0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality (50% vs 22%, p < 0.001). Predictors of AF development are age and previous AF. AF is not an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Predictors are age, creatinine > 1.5 mg/dL at admission, LDH > 250 UI/L at admission and acute respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Atrial fibrillation appears in 10% of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These patients present more comorbidities and two-fold increase in hospital mortality. Atrial fibrillation is not an independent prognostic factor.

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO: La infección por SARS-CoV-2 presenta un amplio espectro clínico, y varios factores pronósticos han sido descritos. La fibrilación auricular (FA) es frecuente en situaciones agudas, donde se ha relacionado con aumento de complicaciones y mortalidad. Nuestro objetivo ha sido evaluar el impacto pronóstico de la FA en esta población. MÉTODOS: Análisis retrospectivo de una cohorte de 517 pacientes con infección SARS-CoV-2 consecutivamente ingresados en un hospital terciario. Dividimos a los pacientes en dos grupos de acuerdo al desarrollo de FA durante el ingreso y comparamos las características de los grupos. Realizamos análisis univariado y multivariado de mortalidad. RESULTADOS: De los 517 pacientes, 54 (10,4%) desarrollaron FA. Estos pacientes son mayores (81,6 vs. 66,5 años, p < 0,001) y presentan más hipertensión (74% vs. 47%, p < 0,001), miocardiopatía (9% vs. 1%, p = 0,002), ingreso previo por insuficiencia cardiaca (9% vs. 0,4%, p < 0,001), historia de FA (83% vs. 1%, p < 0,001) y mayor aurícula izquierda (47,8 vs. 39,9 mm, p < 0,001). Los pacientes con FA presentan más fallo respiratorio agudo (72% vs. 40%, p < 0,001) y mayor mortalidad hospitalaria (50% vs. 22%, p < 0,001). Los predictores de FA son la edad y la historia de FA previa. La FA no es un predictor independiente de mortalidad hospitalaria. Los predictores son: edad, creatinina > 1,5 mg/dL al ingreso, LDH > 250 U/L al ingreso y el fallo respiratorio agudo. CONCLUSIÓN: La FA aparece en el 10% de los pacientes hospitalizados por SARS-CoV-2. Estos presentan mayor comorbilidad y el doble de mortalidad hospitalaria, pero la FA no es un factor pronóstico independiente.

Sepsis of Patients Infected by SARS-CoV-2: Real-World Experience From the International HOPE-COVID-19-Registry and Validation of HOPE Sepsis Score.

Background: Patients with sepsis with a concomitant coronavirus (COVID-19) infection are related to a high morbidity and mortality rate. We investigated a large cohort of patients with sepsis with a concomitant COVID-19, and we developed a risk score for the estimation of sepsis risk in COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a sub-analysis from the international Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry for COVID-19 (HOPE-COVID-19-Registry, NCT04334291). Out of 5,837 patients with COVID-19, 624 patients were diagnosed with sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 International Consensus. Results: In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were identified as independent predictors for developing sepsis: current smoking, tachypnoea (>22 breath per minute), hemoptysis, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) <92%, blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP <90 mmHg and diastolic BP <60 mmHg), Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) <15, elevated procalcitonin (PCT), elevated troponin I (TnI), and elevated creatinine >1.5 mg/dl. By assigning odds ratio (OR) weighted points to these variables, the following three risk categories were defined to develop sepsis during admission: low-risk group (probability of sepsis 3.1-11.8%); intermediate-risk group (24.8-53.8%); and high-risk-group (58.3-100%). A score of 1 was assigned to current smoking, tachypnoea, decreased SpO2, decreased BP, decreased GCS, elevated PCT, TnI, and creatinine, whereas a score of 2 was assigned to hemoptysis. Conclusions: The HOPE Sepsis Score including nine parameters is useful in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients to develop sepsis. Sepsis in COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality rate.

Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in COVID-19: the Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry.

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for COVID-19 is continuously evolving. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin-rich microthrombi in several organs. The aim of the study was therefore to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and its impact on survival. METHODS: 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation-COVID-19 Registry). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. Data on APT, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, were obtained for each patient. RESULTS: During hospitalisation, 730 (9%) patients received single APT (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (74±12 years vs 63±17 years, p<0.01), more frequently male (68% vs 57%, p<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs 16%, p<0.01). Patients treated with APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs 19%, p=0.64), need for invasive ventilation (8.7% vs 8.5%, p=0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs 2.5% p=0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs 2.4%, p=0.43), but had shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8±5 days vs 11±7 days, p=0.01); however, when comparing patients with APT versus no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (log-rank p<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.94). On multivariable analysis, in-hospital APT was associated with lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: APT during hospitalisation for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04334291.

Predictors of poor prognosis in healthy, young, individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infections.

OBJECTIVES: To identify predictors of poor prognosis in previously healthy young individuals admitted to hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. All patients without co-morbidities, without usual treatments and ≤65 years old were selected from an international registry (HOPE-COVID-19, NCT04334291). We focused on baseline variables-symptoms and signs at admission-to analyse risk factors for poor prognosis. The primary end point was a composite of major adverse clinical events during hospitalization including mortality, mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, prone, sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome and embolic events. RESULTS: Overall, 773 healthy young patients were included. The primary composite end point was observed in 29% (225/773) and the overall mortality rate was 3.6% (28/773). In the combined event group, 75% (168/225) of patients were men and the mean age was 49 (±11) years, whereas in the non-combined event group, the prevalence of male gender was 43% (238/548) and the mean age was 42 (±13) years (p < 0.001 for both). On admission, respiratory insufficiency and cough were described in 51.4% (114/222) and 76% (170/223) of patients, respectively, in the combined event group, versus 7.9% (42/533) and 56% (302/543) of patients in the other group (p < 0.001 for both). The strongest independent predictor for the combined end point was desaturation (Spo2 <92%) (OR 5.40; 95% CI 3.34-8.75; p < 0.001), followed by tachypnoea (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.93-5.21; p < 0.001), male gender (OR 3.01; 95% CI 1.96-4.61; p < 0.001) and pulmonary infiltrates on chest X-ray at admission (OR 2.21; 95% CI 1.18-4.16; p 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Major adverse clinical events were unexpectedly high considering the baseline characteristics of the cohort. Signs of respiratory compromise at admission and male gender, were predictive for poor prognosis among young healthy patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

COVID-19 and the impact of arterial hypertension-An analysis of the international HOPE COVID-19 Registry (Italy-Spain-Germany).

BACKGROUND: A systematic analysis of concomitant arterial hypertension in COVID-19 patients and the impact of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have not been studied in a large multicentre cohort yet. We conducted a subanalysis from the international HOPE Registry (https://hopeprojectmd.com, NCT04334291) comparing COVID-19 in presence and absence of arterial hypertension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Out of 5837 COVID-19 patients, 2850 (48.8%) patients had the diagnosis arterial hypertension. 1978/2813 (70.3%) patients were already treated with ACEI or ARBs. The clinical outcome of the present subanalysis included all-cause mortality over 40 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Patients with arterial hypertension suffered significantly more from different complications including respiratory insufficiency (60.8% vs 39.5%), heart failure (9.9% vs 3.1%), acute kidney injury (25.3% vs 7.3%), pneumonia (90.6% vs 86%), sepsis (14.7% vs 7.5%), and bleeding events (3.6% vs 1.6%). The mortality rate was 29.6% in patients with concomitant arterial hypertension and 11.3% without arterial hypertension (P < .001). Invasive and non-invasive respiratory supports were significantly more required in presence of arterial hypertension as compared without it. In the multivariate cox regression analysis, while age≥65, benzodiazepine, antidepressant at admission, elevated LDH or creatinine, respiratory insufficiency and sepsis might be a positive independent predictors of mortality, antiviral drugs, interferon treatment, ACEI or ARBs at discharge or oral anticoagulation at discharge might be an independent negative predictor of the mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate and in-hospital complications might be increased in COVID-19 patients with a concomitant history of arterial hypertension. The history of ACEI or ARBs treatments does not seem to impact the outcome of these patients.