The effect of an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 on endothelial function and arterial stiffness.

To fight the COVID-19 pandemic, messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were the first to be adopted by vaccination programs worldwide. We sought to investigate the short-term effect of mRNA vaccine administration on endothelial function and arterial stiffness. Thirty-two participants (mean age 37 ± 8 years, 20 men) who received the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were studied in three sessions in a sequence-randomized, sham-controlled, assessor-blinded, crossover design. The primary outcome was endothelial function (assessed by brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation (FMD)), and the secondary outcomes were aortic stiffness (evaluated with carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV)) and inflammation (measured by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) in blood samples). The outcomes were assessed prior to and at 8 h and 24 h after the 1st dose of vaccine and at 8 h, 24 h, and 48 h after the 2nd dose. There was an increase in hsCRP that was apparent at 24 h after both the 1st dose (-0.60 [95% confidence intervals [CI]: -1.60 to -0.20], p = 0.013) and the 2nd dose (maximum median difference at 48 h -6.60 [95% CI: -9.80 to -3.40], p < 0.001) compared to placebo. The vaccine did not change PWV. FMD remained unchanged during the 1st dose but decreased significantly by 1.5% (95% CI: 0.1% to 2.9%, p = 0.037) at 24 h after the 2nd dose. FMD values returned to baseline at 48 h. Our study shows that the mRNA vaccine causes a prominent increase in inflammatory markers, especially after the 2nd dose, and a transient deterioration of endothelial function at 24 h that returns to baseline at 48 h. These results confirm the short-term cardiovascular safety of the vaccine.

Time-related aortic inflammatory response, as assessed with 18F-FDG PET/CT, in patients hospitalized with severely or critical COVID-19: the COVAIR study.

AIM: Arterial involvement has been implicated in the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). Fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) imaging is a valuable tool for the assessment of aortic inflammation and is a predictor of outcome. We sought to prospectively assess the presence of aortic inflammation and its time-dependent trend in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Between November 2020 and May 2021, in this pilot, case-control study, we recruited 20 patients with severe or critical COVID-19 (mean age of 59 ± 12 years), while 10 age and sex-matched individuals served as the control group. Aortic inflammation was assessed by measuring 18F-FDG uptake in PET/CT performed 20-120 days post-admission. Global aortic target to background ratio (GLA-TBR) was calculated as the sum of TBRs of ascending and descending aorta, aortic arch, and abdominal aorta divided by 4. Index aortic segment TBR (IAS-TBR) was designated as the aortic segment with the highest TBR. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in aortic 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake between patients and controls (GLA-TBR: 1.46 [1.40-1.57] vs. 1.43 [1.32-1.70], respectively, P = 0.422 and IAS-TBR: 1.60 [1.50-1.67] vs. 1.50 [1.42-1.61], respectively, P = 0.155). There was a moderate correlation between aortic TBR values (both GLA and IAS) and time distance from admission to 18F-FDG PET-CT scan (Spearman's rho = - 0.528, P = 0.017 and Spearman's rho = - 0.480, p = 0.032, respectively). Patients who were scanned less than or equal to 60 days from admission (n = 11) had significantly higher GLA-TBR values compared to patients that were examined more than 60 days post-admission (GLA-TBR: 1.53 [1.42-1.60] vs. 1.40 [1.33-1.45], respectively, P = 0.016 and IAS-TBR: 1.64 [1.51-1.74] vs. 1.52 [1.46-1.60], respectively, P = 0.038). There was a significant difference in IAS- TBR between patients scanned ≤ 60 days and controls (1.64 [1.51-1.74] vs. 1.50 [1.41-1.61], P = 0.036). CONCLUSION: This is the first study suggesting that aortic inflammation, as assessed by 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging, is increased in the early post COVID phase in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 and largely resolves over time. Our findings may have important implications for the understanding of the course of the disease and for improving our preventive and therapeutic strategies.

Safety of same-day discharge versus overnight stay strategy following cardiac device implantations: a high-volume single-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: The strategy of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantations performed as day-case admissions has gained a wider acceptance overtime; however, data on safety are still limited. This study aims to investigate the safety of a same-day discharge protocol introduced in our hospital for the postprocedural management of patients undergoing CIED implantation. METHODS: Α prospective, non-interventional, non-randomised study performed in a single high-volume implanting centre for a 16-month period (March 2020 to June 2021). At total of 821 of 965 (85.1%) patients scheduled for elective CIED implantation were considered to be eligible for inclusion in the Short-stay Device Management Protocol. These patients were compared with a historical group of 932 patients, meeting the same inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Procedure was successful in 812 patients (98.9%), committed to same-day discharge versus 921 of 932 patients (98.8%) admitted for overnight stay (p = 0.87). Overall, 90-day complication rate was comparable in both groups (4.14% vs 4.07%, p = 0.95), as was major (1.46% vs. 1.82%, p = 0.55) and minor (2.67% vs. 2.25%, p = 0.64) complication rates. The composite early post-procedural complication rates and late post-procedural complication rates were comparable among groups (0.97 vs 1.18%, p = 0.70 and 0.73% vs 0.64%, p = 0.83, respectively). Six hundred sixty-seven patients (84%) preferred the same-day discharge strategy. Finally, a reduction of 792 bed-days was recorded, resulting in possible financial Health System benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day discharge is feasible and safe in the majority of patients referred for CIED implantation. Additionally, same-day discharge is preferred by patients and may reduce procedure-related costs due to significant bed-day reductions.

Transmission of Infections during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an emergency lifesaving endeavor, performed in either the hospital or outpatient settings, that significantly improves outcomes and survival rates when performed in a timely fashion. As with any other medical procedure, CPR can bear potential risks not only for the patient but also for the rescuer. Among those risks, transmission of an infectious agent has been one of the most compelling triggers of reluctance to perform CPR among providers. The concern for transmission of an infection from the resuscitated subject may impede prompt initiation and implementation of CPR, compromising survival rates and neurological outcomes of the patients. Infections during CPR can be potentially acquired through airborne, droplet, contact, or hematogenous transmission. However, only a few cases of infection transmission have been actually reported globally. In this review, we present the available epidemiological findings on transmission of different pathogens during CPR and data on reluctance of health care workers to perform CPR. We also outline the levels of personal protective equipment and other protective measures according to potential infectious hazards that providers are potentially exposed to during CPR and summarize current guidelines on protection of CPR providers from international societies and stakeholders.

Hypertensive urgencies during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in a tertiary hospital setting: a U-shaped alarming curve.

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic provoked unprecedented disturbance in hypertension care, while alarming concerns arose about its long-term consequences. We investigated the trends of emergency visits and admissions regarding uncontrolled hypertension in order to assess the impact of COVID-19 spread on population behavior towards hypertension urgencies during its first wave. Material and methods: Data from daily unscheduled visits and admission counts in the Cardiology sector were collected from the Emergency Department database of a tertiary General Hospital in Athens, Greece for the period January 15th to July 15th 2020. These data were compared with those from the previous year. Cases of patients who presented with hypertensive urgency or who were admitted due to uncontrolled hypertension were separately analyzed. Results: A total of 7,373 patient records were analyzed. Hypertension urgency cases demonstrated a U-shaped distribution in 2020, showing a declining trend during the rapid virus spread, an image that was reversed after the transmission rate's decline. COVID-19 incidence in Greece was inversely associated with uncontrolled hypertension admissions during its declining phase (r = -0.64, p = 0.009), whereas total attendance exhibited a similar correlation during the first and the following months of the pandemic (r = 0.677, p = 0.031, r = -0.789, p = 0.001). Uncontrolled hypertension rate on admission was positively related to the national incidence of COVID-19 cases during the first months of 2020 (r = 0.82, p = 0.045). Conclusions: Hypertensive urgency-related visits followed a U-shape distribution during the pandemic's first wave with the attendance nadir coinciding with the virus spread peak. This is a complex phenomenon, closely related to increased levels of public stress, disruptions in health care services and to a lesser extent to the imposed restrictions in transportation. The initial relative increase in uncontrolled hypertension-related admissions rate, combined with the later increase of hypertensive urgencies may be indicative of blood pressure deregulation among the studied population, which is multifactorial and potentially detrimental.

Covid-19 associated reduction in hypertension-related diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in Excellence Centers of the European Society of Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: The Covid-19 pandemic necessitated a decrease in non-Covid-19 related diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in many countries. We explored the impact on tertiary hypertension care. METHODS: We conducted an electronic survey regarding 6 key procedures in hypertension care within the Excellence Center network of the European Society of Hypertension. RESULTS: Overall, 54 Excellence Centers from 18 European and 3 non-European countries participated. From 2019 to 2020, there were significant decreases in the median number per centre of ambulatory blood pressure monitorings (ABPM: 544/289 for 2019/2020), duplex ultrasound of renal arteries (Duplex RA: 88.5/55), computed tomographic/magnetic resonance imaging angiography of renal arteries (CT/MRI RA: 66/19.5), percutaneous angioplasties of renal arteries (PTA RA: 5/1), laboratory tests for catecholamines (116/67.5) and for renin/aldosterone (146/83.5) (p < 0.001 for all comparisons, respectively). While reductions in all assessed diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were observed in all annual 3-months periods in the comparisons between 2019 and 2020, the most pronounced reduction occurred between April and June 2020, which was the period of the first wave and the first lockdown in most affected countries. In this period, the median reductions in 2020, as compared to 2019, were 50.7% (ABPM), 47.1% (Duplex RA), 50% (CT/MRI RA), 57.1% (PTA RA), 46.9% (catecholamines) and 41.0% (renin/aldosterone), respectively. Overall differences in reduction between 3-month time intervals were statistically highly significant. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic and therapeutic procedures related to hypertension were dramatically reduced during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic, with the largest reduction during the first lockdown. The long-term consequences regarding blood pressure control and, ultimately, cardiovascular events remain to be investigated.

Common surgical masks and unattended blood pressure changes in treated hypertensive patients.

Although the effect of face masks on preventing airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is well studied, no study has evaluated their effect on blood pressure (BP). Therefore, we investigated the effect of surgical masks on BP in 265 treated hypertensive patients. Following the routine mask-on office BP measurement, patients were left alone and randomized to automated office BP measurement, with measurements taken after first wearing a mask for 10 min, then without wearing the mask for 10 min, and vice versa. Among the participants, 115 were women (43.4%), the mean age was 62 ± 12 years, and the mean office BP was 134 ± 15/81 ± 12 mmHg. There was no significant difference between mask-on unattended systolic BP (133 ± 15 mmHg) and mask-off unattended systolic BP (132 ± 15 mmHg) (P = 0.13) or between mask-on unattended diastolic BP (77 ± 13 mmHg) and mask-off unattended diastolic BP (76 ± 13 mmHg) (P = 0.32). Surgical masks had no effect on BP in treated hypertensive patients.

Changes in Stroke Hospital Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

[Figure: see text].

Lifestyle, psychological, socioeconomic and environmental factors and their impact on hypertension during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

SUMMARY: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic considerably affects health, wellbeing, social, economic and other aspects of daily life. The impact of COVID-19 on blood pressure (BP) control and hypertension remains insufficiently explored. We therefore provide a comprehensive review of the potential changes in lifestyle factors and behaviours as well as environmental changes likely to influence BP control and cardiovascular risk during the pandemic. This includes the impact on physical activity, dietary patterns, alcohol consumption and the resulting consequences, for example increases in body weight. Other risk factors for increases in BP and cardiovascular risk such as smoking, emotional/psychologic stress, changes in sleep patterns and diurnal rhythms may also exhibit significant changes in addition to novel factors such as air pollution and environmental noise. We also highlight potential preventive measures to improve BP control because hypertension is the leading preventable risk factor for worldwide health during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Impact of SARS-CoV-2 on Stroke Epidemiology and Care: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Emerging data indicate an increased risk of cerebrovascular events with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and highlight the potential impact of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on the management and outcomes of acute stroke. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the aforementioned considerations. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of observational cohort studies reporting on the occurrence and/or outcomes of patients with cerebrovascular events in association with their SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We used a random-effects model. Summary estimates were reported as odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified 18 cohort studies including 67,845 patients. Among patients with SARS-CoV-2, 1.3% (95% CI = 0.9-1.6%, I2 = 87%) were hospitalized for cerebrovascular events, 1.1% (95% CI = 0.8-1.3%, I2 = 85%) for ischemic stroke, and 0.2% (95% CI = 0.1-0.3%, I2 = 64%) for hemorrhagic stroke. Compared to noninfected contemporary or historical controls, patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection had increased odds of ischemic stroke (OR = 3.58, 95% CI = 1.43-8.92, I2 = 43%) and cryptogenic stroke (OR = 3.98, 95% CI = 1.62-9.77, I2 = 0%). Diabetes mellitus was found to be more prevalent among SARS-CoV-2 stroke patients compared to noninfected historical controls (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.00-1.94, I2 = 0%). SARS-CoV-2 infection status was not associated with the likelihood of receiving intravenous thrombolysis (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.65-3.10, I2 = 0%) or endovascular thrombectomy (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.35-1.74, I2 = 0%) among hospitalized ischemic stroke patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Odds of in-hospital mortality were higher among SARS-CoV-2 stroke patients compared to noninfected contemporary or historical stroke patients (OR = 5.60, 95% CI = 3.19-9.80, I2 = 45%). INTERPRETATION: SARS-CoV-2 appears to be associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke, and potentially cryptogenic stroke in particular. It may also be related to an increased mortality risk. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:380-388.

Correction to: The mystery of "missing" visits in an emergency cardiology department, in the era of COVID-19.; a time-series analysis in a tertiary Greek General Hospital.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

Effect of Colchicine vs Standard Care on Cardiac and Inflammatory Biomarkers and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The GRECCO-19 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has evolved into a global pandemic. Low-dose colchicine combines anti-inflammatory action with a favorable safety profile. Objective: To evaluate the effect of treatment with colchicine on cardiac and inflammatory biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial (the Greek Study in the Effects of Colchicine in COVID-19 Complications Prevention), 105 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized in a 1:1 allocation from April 3 to April 27, 2020, to either standard medical treatment or colchicine with standard medical treatment. The study took place in 16 tertiary hospitals in Greece. Intervention: Colchicine administration (1.5-mg loading dose followed by 0.5 mg after 60 min and maintenance doses of 0.5 mg twice daily) with standard medical treatment for as long as 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were (1) maximum high-sensitivity cardiac troponin level; (2) time for C-reactive protein to reach more than 3 times the upper reference limit; and (3) time to deterioration by 2 points on a 7-grade clinical status scale, ranging from able to resume normal activities to death. Secondary end points were (1) the percentage of participants requiring mechanical ventilation, (2) all-cause mortality, and (3) number, type, severity, and seriousness of adverse events. The primary efficacy analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results: A total of 105 patients were evaluated (61 [58.1%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 64 [54-76] years) with 50 (47.6%) randomized to the control group and 55 (52.4%) to the colchicine group. Median (interquartile range) peak high-sensitivity cardiac troponin values were 0.0112 (0.0043-0.0093) ng/mL in the control group and 0.008 (0.004-0.0135) ng/mL in the colchicine group (P = .34). Median (interquartile range) maximum C-reactive protein levels were 4.5 (1.4-8.9) mg/dL vs 3.1 (0.8-9.8) mg/dL (P = .73), respectively. The clinical primary end point rate was 14.0% in the control group (7 of 50 patients) and 1.8% in the colchicine group (1 of 55 patients) (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.96; P = .02). Mean (SD) event-free survival time was 18.6 (0.83) days the in the control group vs 20.7 (0.31) in the colchicine group (log rank P = .03). Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, except for diarrhea, which was more frequent with colchicine group than the control group (25 patients [45.5%] vs 9 patients [18.0%]; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, participants who received colchicine had statistically significantly improved time to clinical deterioration. There were no significant differences in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or C-reactive protein levels. These findings should be interpreted with caution. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04326790.

The mystery of "missing" visits in an emergency cardiology department, in the era of COVID-19.; a time-series analysis in a tertiary Greek General Hospital.

BACKGROUND: In the era of the current COVID-19 health crisis, the aim of the present study was to explore population behavior as regards the visits in the Εmergency Cardiology department (ECD) of a tertiary General Hospital that does not hospitalize SARS-CoV-2 infected patients METHODS AND RESULTS: Daily number of visits at the EDC and admissions to Cardiology Wards and Intensive Care Unit of a tertiary General Hospital, in Athens, Greece, were retrieved from hospital's database (January 1st-April 30th 2018, 2019 and 2020). A highly significant reduction in the visits at ECD of the hospital during March and April 2020 was observed as compared with January and February of the same year (p for linear trend < ·001); in particular the number of visits was 41.1% lower in March 2020 and 32.7% lower in April 2020, as compared to January 2020. As the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases throughout the country increased (i.e., from February 26th to April 2nd) the number of visits at ECD decreased (p = 0.01), whereas, the opposite was observed in the period afterwards (p = 0.01).The number of acute Myocardial infarctions (MI) cases in March 2020 was the lowest compared to the entire three year period (p < 0·001); however, the number of acute MI cases in April 2020 was doubled as compared to March 2020, but still was lower than the preceding years (p < 0·001). CONCLUSIONS: It is hard to explain the mystery of the "missing" emergency hospital visits. However, if this decline in cardiovascular disease related hospital visits is "true", it is something that needs to be rigorously studied, to learn how to keep these rates down.

COVID-19 pandemic and cardiovascular disease: where do we stand?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) which recently has been characterized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) having killed almost 250,000 people worldwide as of May 4^th, 2020. Despite the fact that SARS-CoV-2 seems to predominantly affect the respiratory system leading to pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, it is now evident that it may also affect the cardiovascular system in multiple ways. The current paper is a review of the most recent literature regarding SARS-CoV-2 infection and its associated main cardiovascular clinical manifestations. Cardiovascular disease represents a prevalent underlying comorbidity associated with increased mortality rates among COVID-19 affected individuals. In addition, various cardiovascular manifestations have been linked to the viral insult, including among others acute coronary syndromes, myocarditis, acute heart failure, cardiac injury, arrhythmias and acute pulmonary embolism. Further studies are required in order to establish the complicated association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and its effects on the cardiovascular system. Our knowledge regarding diagnostic approaches, therapeutic management and preventive measures is constantly enriched throughout an abundance of ongoing research in the respective fields.