COVID-19 myocarditis and long-term heart failure sequelae.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The clinical syndrome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic leading to significant morbidity and mortality. Cardiac dysfunction is commonly seen in these patients, often presenting as clinical heart failure. Accordingly, we aim to provide a comprehensive review on COVID-19 myocarditis and its long-term heart failure sequelae. RECENT FINDINGS: Several suspected cases of COVID-19 myocarditis have been reported. It is often not clear if the acute myocardial dysfunction is caused by myocarditis or secondary to generalized inflammatory state of cytokine release or microvascular thrombotic angiopathy. Ischemia may also need to be ruled out. Regardless, myocardial dysfunction in these patients is associated with poor overall prognosis. Laboratory testing, echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and even endomyocardial biopsy may be needed for timely diagnosis. Several treatment strategies have been described, including both supportive and targeted therapies. SUMMARY: COVID-19 can cause a spectrum of ventricular dysfunction ranging from mild disease to fulminant myocarditis with hemodynamic instability. Future research is needed to understand the true prevalence of COVID-19 myocarditis, as well as to better define various diagnostic protocols and treatment strategies.

Geographical Differences in Cardiovascular Comorbidities and Outcomes of COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular comorbidities may predispose to adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, across the USA, the burden of cardiovascular comorbidities varies significantly. Whether clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 differ between regions has not yet been studied systematically. Here, we report differences in underlying cardiovascular comorbidities and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Texas and in New York state. METHODS: We established a multicenter retrospective registry including patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 15 and July 12, 2020. Demographic and clinical data were manually retrieved from electronic medical records. We focused on the following outcomes: mortality, need for pharmacologic circulatory support, need for mechanical ventilation, and need for hemodialysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Patients in the Texas cohort (n = 296) were younger (57 vs. 63 years, p value <0.001), they had a higher BMI (30.3 kg/m2 vs. 28.5 kg/m2, p = 0.015), and they had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (41 vs. 30%; p = 0.014). In contrast, patients in the New York state cohort (n = 218) had higher rates of coronary artery disease (19 vs. 10%, p = 0.005) and atrial fibrillation (11 vs. 5%, p = 0.012). Pharmacologic circulatory support, mechanical ventilation, and hemodialysis were more frequent in the Texas cohort (21 vs. 13%, p = 0.020; 30 vs. 12%, p < 0.001; and 11 vs. 5%, p = 0.009, respectively). In-hospital mortality was similar between the 2 cohorts (16 vs. 18%, p = 0.469). After adjusting for differences in underlying comorbidities, only the use of mechanical ventilation remained significantly higher in the participating Texas hospitals (odds ratios [95% CI]: 3.88 [1.23, 12.24]). Median time to pharmacologic circulatory support was 8 days (interquartile range: 2, 13.8) in the Texas cohort compared to 1 day (0, 3) in the New York state cohort, while median time to in-hospital mortality was 16 days (10, 25.5) and 7 days (4, 14), respectively (both p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in the late versus the early study phase in the New York state cohort (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.050), while it was similar between the 2 phases in the Texas cohort (16 vs. 15%, p = 0.741). CONCLUSIONS: Geographical differences, including practice pattern variations and the impact of disease burden on provision of health care, are important for the evaluation of COVID-19 outcomes. Unadjusted data may cause bias affecting future regulatory policies and proper allocation of resources.

Cardiovascular Toxicities of Androgen Deprivation Therapy.

OPINION STATEMENT: Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men, and cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in patients with prostate cancer. Androgen deprivation therapy, the cornerstone of prostate cancer treatment, has been associated with adverse cardiovascular events. Emerging data supports decreased cardiovascular risk of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists compared to agonists. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing the relative safety of different modalities of androgen deprivation therapy. Racial disparities in cardiovascular outcomes in prostate cancer patients are starting to be explored. An intriguing inquiry connects androgen deprivation therapy with reduced risk of COVID-19 infection susceptibility and severity. Recognition of the cardiotoxicity of androgen deprivation therapy and aggressive risk factor modification are crucial for optimal patient care.

Cardiovascular Care of the Oncology Patient During COVID-19: An Expert Consensus Document From the ACC Cardio-Oncology and Imaging Councils.

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Cardio-Oncology and Imaging Councils of the American College of Cardiology offers recommendations to clinicians regarding the cardiovascular care of cardio-oncology patients in this expert consensus statement. Cardio-oncology patients-individuals with an active or prior cancer history and with or at risk of cardiovascular disease-are a rapidly growing population who are at increased risk of infection, and experiencing severe and/or lethal complications by COVID-19. Recommendations for optimizing screening and monitoring visits to detect cardiac dysfunction are discussed. In addition, judicious use of multimodality imaging and biomarkers are proposed to identify myocardial, valvular, vascular, and pericardial involvement in cancer patients. The difficulties of diagnosing the etiology of cardiovascular complications in patients with cancer and COVID-19 are outlined, along with weighing the advantages against risks of exposure, with the modification of existing cardiovascular treatments and cardiotoxicity surveillance in patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and Cardiovascular Health Among Patients with Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continues to spread with rising new cases and deaths. Patients with cancer represent a uniquely vulnerable population not only with higher susceptibility to COVID-19 but also at increased risk for its complications. This review focuses on the implications of COVID-19 in the cardiovascular health of patients with cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients more susceptible to COVID-19 with increased severity of disease include those with cancer and cardiovascular comorbidities. In addition, the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 including acute myocardial injury, thromboembolism, cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, and pericardial disease overlap with many of those encountered during cancer treatment. Despite the absence of large studies of patients with both cancer and cardiovascular disease, the incidence of cardiovascular complications in cancer patients with COVID-19 is expected to be high. This has implications for cardiac monitoring, chemotherapy administration, and the diagnosis and treatment of cardiovascular disease during COVID-19.