Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 33
Filter
1.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 987008, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2154703

ABSTRACT

In atrial and ventricular tachyarrhythmias, reduced time for ventricular filling and loss of atrial contribution lead to a significant reduction in cardiac output, resulting in cardiogenic shock. This may also occur during catheter ablation in 11% of overall procedures and is associated with increased mortality. Managing cardiogenic shock and (supra) ventricular arrhythmias is particularly challenging. Inotropic support may exacerbate tachyarrhythmias or accelerate heart rate; antiarrhythmic drugs often come with negative inotropic effects, and electrical reconversions may risk worsening circulatory failure or even cardiac arrest. The drop in native cardiac output during an arrhythmic storm can be partly covered by the insertion of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices guaranteeing end-organ perfusion. This provides physicians a time window of stability to investigate the underlying cause of arrhythmia and allow proper therapeutic interventions (e.g., percutaneous coronary intervention and catheter ablation). Temporary MCS can be used in the case of overt hemodynamic decompensation or as a "preemptive strategy" to avoid circulatory instability during interventional cardiology procedures in high-risk patients. Despite the increasing use of MCS in cardiogenic shock and during catheter ablation procedures, the recommendation level is still low, considering the lack of large observational studies and randomized clinical trials. Therefore, the evidence on the timing and the kinds of MCS devices has also scarcely been investigated. In the current review, we discuss the available evidence in the literature and gaps in knowledge on the use of MCS devices in the setting of ventricular arrhythmias and arrhythmic storms, including a specific focus on pathophysiology and related therapies.

2.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 9(22): e017364, 2020 11 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064368

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitalization , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Protective Factors , Registries , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
Crit Care Explor ; 2(9): e0220, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1795067

ABSTRACT

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%.

4.
Am J Cardiol ; 167: 133-138, 2022 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1702670

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Deprescriptions , Hospital Mortality , Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Sodium Potassium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Renin-Angiotensin System , SARS-CoV-2
5.
ESC Heart Fail ; 9(1): 263-269, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1650198

ABSTRACT

Recent data support the existence of a distinctive 'vascular' phenotype with the involvement of both pulmonary parenchyma and its circulation in COVID-19 pneumonia. Its prompt identification is important for the accurate management of COVID-19 patients. The aim is to analyse the pro and contra of the different modalities to identify the 'vascular' phenotype. Chest computed tomography scan and angiogram may quantify both parenchyma and vascular damage, but the presence of thrombosis of pulmonary microcirculation may be missed. Increased d-dimer concentration confirms a thrombotic state, but it cannot localize the thrombus. An elevation of troponin concentration non-specifically reflects cardiac injury. Echocardiogram and electrocardiogram provide specific signs of right ventricular pressure overload. This is particularly relevant for the 'vascular' phenotype, which does not necessarily represent the result of thrombo-embolic venous complications, but more frequently, it is the result of pulmonary microcirculation thrombosis in situ and needs immediate therapeutic action. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Despite diagnosis of the 'vascular' phenotype of COVID-19 pneumonia may be subtle, the evidence indicates a reasonable possibility of identifying it already in the initial stage of the infection. Chest computed tomography scan and angiogram, increased d-dimer concentration, and elevation of troponin concentration may be not sufficient to identify 'vascular' phenotype. Echocardiogram and electrocardiogram provide specific signs of right ventricular pressure overload. This is particularly relevant for the 'vascular' phenotype, which does not necessarily represent the result of thrombo-embolic venous complications, but more frequently, it is the result of pulmonary microcirculation thrombosis in situ and needs immediate therapeutic action.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Humans , Lung , Phenotype , SARS-CoV-2
6.
The American journal of cardiology ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1615312

ABSTRACT

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.

7.
European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology ; 23(Suppl G), 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1601777

ABSTRACT

Recent data support the existence of a distinctive ‘vascular’ phenotype with the involvement of both pulmonary parenchyma and its circulation in COVID-19 pneumonia. Its prompt identification is important for the accurate management of COVID-19 patients. The aim is to analyse the pro and contra of the different modalities to identify the ‘vascular’ phenotype. Chest computed tomography scan and angiogram may quantify both parenchyma and vascular damage, but the presence of thrombosis of pulmonary micro-circulation may be missed. Increased d-dimer concentration confirms a thrombotic state, but it cannot localize the thrombus. An elevation of troponin concentration nonspecifically reflects cardiac injury. Echocardiogram and electrocardiogram provide specific signs of right ventricular pressure overload. This is particularly relevant for the ‘vascular’ phenotype which does not necessarily represent the result of thromboembolic venous complications but, more frequently, it is the result of pulmonary microcirculation thrombosis in situ and needs immediate therapeutic action.

8.
Eur Heart J Suppl ; 23(Suppl E): E1-E5, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470141

ABSTRACT

The term Long COVID (or Post COVID) describes a condition characterized by persistence of symptoms for at least 12 weeks after the onset of COVID-19. It may last several months but the duration is still matter of observation. The symptoms and the clinical manifestations are clinically heterogeneous and suggesting involvement of multi-organs/systems, including the cardiovascular system. The general recurrent symptoms include fatigue, breathlessness, myalgia, headache, loss of memory, and impaired concentration. Patients report loss of their previous psychophysical performance. Cardiovascular involvement manifests with common symptoms such as palpitations and chest pain, and, less commonly, with events such as late arterial and venous thromboembolisms, heart failure episodes, strokes or transient ischaemic attack, 'myo-pericarditis'. The diagnostic criteria are mainly based on the narrative of the patients. Measurable biomarkers or instrumental findings or clinical events are not yet framed in a shared diagnostic framework. The open question for clinicians and researchers is whether biomarkers, electrocardiogram, non-invasive imaging, and clinical monitoring should be included in a shared diagnostic protocol aimed at defining the diagnostic path and protecting patients at risk of unexpected events.

10.
Phlebology ; 36(10): 835-840, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1295343

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to analyze the specificity, accuracy and sensitivity of a simple, easy to calculate, prognostic score for hospitalized COVID19 patients developing deep vein thrombosis. METHODS: From March 1st to April 28th, 942 COVID-19 patients with severe symptoms were admitted to the hospital San Matteo of Pavia-Italy. Thirty two patients (3.4%) developed deep vein thrombosis during hospitalization. In all patients hemostatic and inflammatory parameters were abnormal. A simple prognostic score was developed based on the presence of specific co morbidities and D-dimers levels (quick San Matthew Score-quick SMS). RESULTS: Nine patients died in a condition of multiple organ failure, 23 patients (71.9%) survived and left the hospital in good general conditions. The developed score was based simply on two parameters: 1) presence of four specific co morbidities and 2)systemic levels of D-Dimers. The quick San Matthew Score resulted in a sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy of more than 90% (94%, 92%,93% respectively) and compared favorably with other scores. The score was prospectively validated in 100 COVID19 patients who developed deep vein thrombosis collected from the literature and prospectively confirmed in our hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study underline the importance of an immediate aggressive therapeutic approach for moderate and high-risk patients with COVID19 infection. The quick SMS score may help to identify patients at high risk for mortality and to follow the clinical outcome of the patient. A simple, easy to calculate prognostic score may also facilitate communication among health workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Venous Thrombosis , Hospitalization , Humans , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/therapy
14.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 72: 191-195, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1037070

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection represents a serious threat to public health because it leads to a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations. The region Lombardia (Italy) has suffered from severe problems during the acute phase of the outbreak in Italy (March-April 2020). The aim of our analysis is to report the experience of the Department of Vascular Surgery of Pavia, including the learned lessons and future perspectives, considering that the COVID-19 outbreak is in its acute phase in other continents. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, observational study based on extracted data from the medical records of all consecutive COVID-19 patients observed in our Vascular Department between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. We reviewed the records for demographic information, comorbidities, laboratory tests, and anticoagulation treatment at the time of hospital admission. RESULTS: We observed an important reduction in elective and urgent interventions compared to the same period of the previous year; in parallel, we observed an increase in the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients, especially with severe infection. In our department, four infections were reported among health workers. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of the COVID19 pandemic on health-care delivery has been massive. A wave of vascular-related complications is expected. Regular SARS-CoV-2 screening, adequate protection, and quick reorganization of health-care resources are still needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Surgery Department, Hospital/organization & administration , Vascular Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Eur Heart J ; 41(19): 1839-1851, 2020 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-260376

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to healthcare worldwide. The infection can be life threatening and require intensive care treatment. The transmission of the disease poses a risk to both patients and healthcare workers. The number of patients requiring hospital admission and intensive care may overwhelm health systems and negatively affect standard care for patients presenting with conditions needing emergency interventions. This position statements aims to assist cardiologists in the invasive management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To that end, we assembled a panel of interventional cardiologists and acute cardiac care specialists appointed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACVC) and included the experience from the first and worst affected areas in Europe. Modified diagnostic and treatment algorithms are proposed to adapt evidence-based protocols for this unprecedented challenge. Various clinical scenarios, as well as management algorithms for patients with a diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 infection, presenting with ST- and non-ST-segment elevation ACS are described. In addition, we address the need for re-organization of ACS networks, with redistribution of hub and spoke hospitals, as well as for in-hospital reorganization of emergency rooms and cardiac units, with examples coming from multiple European countries. Furthermore, we provide a guidance to reorganization of catheterization laboratories and, importantly, measures for protection of healthcare providers involved with invasive procedures.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Cardiology/standards , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Acute Coronary Syndrome/virology , COVID-19 , Cardiology/methods , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/virology
17.
Minerva Anestesiol ; 86(12): 1340-1345, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-994926

ABSTRACT

Acute cardiac injury incidence in COVID-19 is about 13 times higher in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)/severely ill than in less critical patients. Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities seem to be more prone to develop higher acuity of the infection, and myocardial injury has been reported amongst them in up to 15% of those hospitalized and up to 30% of ICU-admitted ones. The symptoms of over ischemia/heart failure may be challenging to distinguish as dyspnea and chest discomfort overlap with those due to COVID-19. Therefore, beside close monitoring with electrocardiography, biomarkers and, in case of demonstrated cardiac involvement, echocardiography, strategies to improve myocardial oxygen delivery should be promptly applied. The cytokine release with complement and iNO dysregulation are established mechanisms potentially leading to sepsis-related cardiomyopathy, making sepsis per se one of the potential mechanism leading to acute cardiac injury in COVID-19 patients. Moreover, the hyper-inflammation with endothelial dysfunction is likely be responsible of both pulmonary in-situ platelet aggregation and deep thrombosis potentially leading to severe pulmonary embolism and right ventricular failure. Besides the customary antithrombotic prophylaxis for critical patients, D-dimer levels and tighter coagulation monitoring are recommended and should guide the choice for anticoagulation treatment. We summarize the current knowledge regarding cardiovascular involvement in patient with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness/therapy , Heart Diseases/etiology , Heart Diseases/therapy , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/genetics , Humans , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/etiology , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/therapy
18.
Crit Care ; 24(1): 665, 2020 Nov 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992529

ABSTRACT

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

19.
Crit Care ; 24(1): 702, 2020 12 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992527

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has caused great devastation in the past year. Multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) including lung ultrasound (LUS) and focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) as a clinical adjunct has played a significant role in triaging, diagnosis and medical management of COVID-19 patients. The expert panel from 27 countries and 6 continents with considerable experience of direct application of PoCUS on COVID-19 patients presents evidence-based consensus using GRADE methodology for the quality of evidence and an expedited, modified-Delphi process for the strength of expert consensus. The use of ultrasound is suggested in many clinical situations related to respiratory, cardiovascular and thromboembolic aspects of COVID-19, comparing well with other imaging modalities. The limitations due to insufficient data are highlighted as opportunities for future research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Consensus , Echocardiography/standards , Expert Testimony/standards , Internationality , Point-of-Care Systems/standards , COVID-19/therapy , Echocardiography/methods , Expert Testimony/methods , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Thromboembolism/diagnostic imaging , Thromboembolism/therapy , Triage/methods , Triage/standards , Ultrasonography/standards
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL