Clinical evolution of patients with AF and diabetes mellitus in the COVID-19 pandemic. REFADI Registry

Introduction and objectives: To analyze the evolution of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes in the mid-term follow-up during the COVID-19 pandemic and to describe its impact on this population. Method(s): Multicenter and prospective registry that included patients with AF and diabetes attended in cardiology clinics. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the variables associated with the occurrence of clinical events and mortality. Recruitment was performed in February-December 2019. Result(s): The evolution of 633 patients, 96,2% of those included in the REFADI registry with a median follow-up of 835 days was analyzed (mean age 73.8 +/- 8.5 years, 54.3% male, CHA2DS2-VASc 4,34 +/- 1,4, HAS-BLED 2,47 +/- 0,96) were analyzed. The proportion of anticoagulated patients remained constant (95.6% vs 94.5%;P = .24). There was a decrease in the prescription of vitamin K antagonists (from 31.4% to 19.7%;P < .01), and an increase in the use of direct anticoagulants (from 62.0% to 70.3%;P < .01). During the follow-up there was an increase in the prescription of SGLT2 inhibitors (from 20.0% to 25.5%;P < .01) and GLP1 agonists (from 4.2% to 9.1%;P < .01). During this period, 17.2% of patients died, the majority from cardiovascular causes, 6.4% from COVID-19, 2.8% from stroke, and 1.8% from hemorrhage. Older age, lower ejection fraction, lower hemoglobin levels, and especially lower direct anticoagulants prescription were associated with mortality. Conclusion(s): Patients with AF and diabetes have a high thromboembolic risk and a high risk of developing complications, especially of cardiovascular origin.Copyright © 2023 Sociedad Espanola de Cardiologia

Frequent need for apixaban dose adjustment for atrial fibrillation in an unselected acute medical admission population during the COVID 19 pandemic

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, systematic switching patients of eligible patients with atrial fibrillation from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) was encouraged to simplify drug dosing and obviate the need for regular monitoring. Regional exclusions to switching included mechanical heart valves, moderate to severe mitral stenosis and stage 5 chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]< 15ml/min/1.73m2). However, each DOAC requires dose adjustment depending on renal function and other patient factors. Purpose(s): Failure to dose reduce when indicated leads to excessive serum drug concentration and increased risk of major haemorrhage, particularly in patients who are acutely unwell. We thus quantified the likelihood of need for dose adjustment in an unselected acute medical admission population. Method(s): While on call, a single investigator prospectively identified all patients admitted on the acute medical or cardiology take-in between 1/ 12/21 and 1/2/22 who were taking apixaban for atrial fibrillation. Apixaban was selected as the study DOAC as it was the most commonly used DOAC but had the most complex dose adjustment algorithm and hence risk of dose error. In order to determine the appropriate drug dosage, patient age, weight, serum creatinine and eGFR were recorded. Dose reduction to 2.5mg was required if the patient meet 2 of the following 3 criteria of [age>80 years, weight <60kg, serum creatinine >133umol/l], or a single criterion, had an eGFR <30ml/min/1.73m2. Drug discontinuation was required if eGFR was <15ml/min/1.73m2. Result(s): All patients identified (n=50) had a CHA2DS2-VASc score of >=2. Patients with active COVID-19 infection were excluded. Mean age was 77.2 years (range 46-102). Mean weight was 78kg (range 52-101). Mean serum creatinine was 212umol/l (range 62-595). Mean eGFR was 33ml/min/1.73m2 (range 8 to >60). Of the 50 patients, 24 (48%) were taking the appropriate apixaban dose on admission which did not require dose adjustment (18 of whom were appropriately taking 5mg bd and 6 were taking 2.5mg bd). Dose reduction from 5mg bd to 2.5mg bd was required in 17 (34%) patients. Stopping treatment, at least temporarily due to eGFR<15ml/min/1.73m2, was indicated in 9 (18%) of patients. No patient required an increase in drug dose. (Graph 1) Conclusion(s): Over half of acute medical or cardiology patients admitted within a COVID-19 setting and taking apixaban for atrial fibrillation required at least temporary drug dose adjustment or discontinuation. Clinicians should expect that adjustment of apixaban dose may be required during acute admission.

Periinterventional management of edoxaban in major procedures: Results from the DRESDEN NOAC REGISTRY

Introduction Edoxaban is a non-vitamin K dependent oral anticoagulant (NOAC) licensed for venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment or stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF). Major surgical procedures are not uncommon in anticoagulated patients but data on perioperative edoxaban management are scarce. Method Using data from the prospective DRESDEN NOAC REGISTRY we extracted data on major surgical procedures in patients who took edoxaban within the preceding 7 days. Periinterventional edoxaban management patterns and rates of outcome events were evaluated until day 30 after procedure. Results Between 2011 and 2021, 3448 procedures were identified in edoxaban patients, including 287 (8.3 %) major procedures. Overall, patient characteristics were comparable for major and non-major procedures, but significant differences existed with regard to gender, concomitant antiplatelet therapies and the proportion of patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score >= 2 (Table 1). Major procedures consisted of orthopaedic/trauma surgery (44.3 %);open pelvic, abdominal or thoracic surgery (30.4 %), central nervous system surgery and procedures (13.9 %), vascular surgery (9.1 %) and extensive wound revision surgery (2.4 %). A scheduled interruption of edoxaban was observed in 284/287 major procedures (99 %) with a total median edoxaban interruption time of 11.0 days (25- 75th percentile 5.0-18.0 days). Heparin bridging was documented in 183 procedures (46 prophylactic dosages, 111 intermediate and 26 therapeutic dosages). Overall, 7 (2.4 %;95 %-CI 1.2 %-4.9 %) major cardiovascular events (5 VTE, 2 arterial thromboembolic events) occurred and 63 bleeding events were observed in 287 major procedures (22.0 %;95 %-CI 17.6 %-2.71 %), comprising of 38 ISTH major bleeding events (13.2 %;95 %-CI 9.8 %-17.7 %) and 25 ISTH CRNM bleedings (8.7 %;95 %-CI 6.0 %-12.5 %). Rates of major cardiovascular events with or without heparin bridging were comparable (6/183;3.3 %;95 %-CI 1.5 %-7.0 % vs. 1/36;2.8 %;95 %-CI 0.5 %-14.2 %;p = 0.7173). ISTH major bleeding occurred numerically more frequent in patients receiving heparin bridging (30/183;16.4 %;95 %-CI 11.7 %-22.4 %) versus procedures without heparin bridging (2/36;5.6 %;95 %-CI 1.5 %-18.1 %;p = 0.1542) (Fig. 1). Within 30 days of follow up, 6 patients died (2.1 %;95 %-CI 1.0 %-4.5 %) with causes of death being a ruptured truncus coeliacus following palliative angioplasty for an infiltrating pancreas cancer (ruled as fatal bleeding), septic organ failure, pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia, COVID-19-pneumonia, septic complications following clipping of a ruptured cerebrovascular aneurism or terminal malignant disease. No fatal cardiovascular event occurred. Conclusion Within the limitations of our study design, periprocedural edoxaban management seems effective and safe in routine care. Use of heparin bridging seems to have limited effects on reducing vascular events but may increase bleeding risk. (Table Presented).

Effective Therapeutic intervention for LAA thrombus: Percutaneous LAA closure

Background And Aim: Left atrial appendage occlusion is a feasible and effective therapeutic intervention for thromboembolic prevention in patients with non-valvular AF. Some procedural difficulties, such as thrombus formation in LAA, can be challenging for operators and increase periprocedural complication risk. In this clinical study, outcomes of LAA closure in patients with LAA thrombus were evaluated. Method(s): One hundred and fifty consecutive patients had undergone percutaneous LAA closure in our clinic between 2015 and 2021. Sixteen patients had thrombus formation in LAA before occlusion and enrolled in the study. Patients were apprised of a paravalvular leak and thrombus formation on the device with transesophageal echocardiography 1, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. One year after the closure, evaluation with transesophageal echocardiography was done only under clinical suspicion. Major adverse clinical events during follow-up, including disabling stroke, clinically relevant hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality, were recorded. Result(s): Sixteen patients had been followed for a median of 36 months (1-60 months). The median age was 71.1 +/- 6.7 years. Nine patients were male (56.3%). CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores were calculated at 5 (2-8) and 5 (1-6), respectively. In four patients, LAA occlusion was indicated due to malign LAA. LAA occlusion was performed with Amplatzer Amulet Device in all patients. Postprocedural antiplatelet treatment was decided on clopidogrel, DAPT, or oral anticoagulant plus clopidogrel in 3, 9, and 4 patients, respectively. Five patients died during follow-up. Covid-19 related respiratory failure was responsible for death in three patients. Five patients were hospitalized due to heart failure, and 2 of them died during the hospitalization. Any clinically significant cerebrovascular event or major bleeding was not observed during follow-up. The first month and sixth-month echocardiographic evaluations were done on all patients. Peridevice leak or thrombus formation was not observed in any patients. Conclusion(s): LAA closure in patients with LAA thrombus is a feasible and effective method to reduce thromboembolic risk. It can be performed as an alternative therapy to OACs in patients who have contraindications to OACs or malign LAA. (Figure Presented).

Are drug-drug interactions clinically relevant? Use of edoxaban concomitant to ritonavir in COVID-19 hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation

Background: During the first wave of the SARS-CoV- 2 pandemic, management of anticoagulation therapy in hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) was simplified to low-molecular- weight heparin (LMWH), mainly due to the risk of drug-drug interactions. However, not all potential drug-drug interactions are clinically relevant. The metabolism of edoxaban by CYP3A4 is less than 4%, the risk of drug-drug interactions with edoxaban is low. There are few data on the interaction between edoxaban and ritonavir. Aim(s): To determine whether the effectiveness and safety of edoxaban or LMWH differed between patients with AF who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 infection and received empirical treatment with ritonavir. In addition, we analyzed length of stay, the proportion of patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit, and mortality. Method(s): Observational, retrospective, and multicenter study that consecutively included hospitalized patients with non-valvular AF who received anticoagulant treatment with LMWH or edoxaban concomitantly with empirical therapy for COVID-19 infection. Result(s): From March 5th to April 27th, 2020, 464 patients were included (80.3+/-7.7 years, 50.0% men, CHA2DS2-VASc 4.1 +/- 1.4;HAS-BLED 2.6 +/- 1.0). Regarding COVID-19 therapy during hospitalization, patients were taking azithromycin (98.7%), hydroxychloroquine (89.7%), and ritonavir/lopinavir (81.5%). The mean length of hospital stay was 14.6 +/- 7.2 days and mean total follow-up (from admission to the last visit) was 31.6 +/- 13.4 days. Furthermore, 12.9% of patients required admission to the intensive care unit, 18.5% of patients died, and 9.9% had a bleeding complication (34.8% major bleeding). Except for length of hospital stay, which was longer in patients taking LMWH (16.0 +/- 7.7 vs. 13.3 +/- 6.5 days;p = 0.005), data for the remaining outcomes were similar in patients treated with edoxaban and those treated with LMWH. Conclusion(s): No significant differences were found between patients treated with edoxaban and patients treated with LMWH in terms of the percentage admitted to the intensive care unit, mortality rates, arterial and venous thromboembolic complications, and bleeds. (Figure Presented).

Implementing Systematic Screening Driven by Quality Improvement Education (QIE) for Atrial Fibrillation during the Covid-19 Pandemic: Insight from Primary Care Setting in the United States

Background: Asymptomatic patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) pose challenges to diagnosis. Early diagnosis can reduce morbidity and mortality. Systematic screening in primary care may result in early intervention. Objectives: We sought to examine the implementation outcomes of a systematic, team-based quality improvement education (QIE) intervention for AF screening in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: QIE intervention was implemented in academic-based (n=4) and community-based (n=2) practices to address COVID-19 challenges. Surveys administered by site identified existing approaches and provider teams developed screening protocol based on targeted education, deploying a mobile ECG device (Kardiamobile™). Patient charts were reviewed (Dec 2020-May 2021) to determine eligibility, i.e., patients aged 65-74 (with prior stroke/TIA or two other risk factors) or aged ≥75 (with one other risk factor) without prior AF. Patient EHR data were examined for demographic/clinical data and screening outcome. Provider interviews (n=12) and validation from representative patients (n=2) accounted for sustainability of outcomes. Results: A total of 1,221 patients were evaluated for AF risk, with 408 eligible for screening. Of these, 277 (68%) were female and CHA2DS2-VASc varied-score=3 (45%);score=4 (24%);score=5+ (31%). Patients (n=7;2%) who screened positive for AF were referred or started on anticoagulation, like other primary care studies. Figure 1 shows how systematic screening was re-imagined and implemented Satisfaction and engagement increased among providers and patients-attributed, in part, to benefits of team-based planning and targeted education. Conclusion: An AF screening program was adapted to improve patient care despite COVID-19 related challenges. A QIE toolkit was launched to assist primary care practices with implementing streamlined, sustainable, and patient-engaging strategies to reduce stroke.

Accidental diagnosis of significant coronary artery disease by cardiac CT scan to rule out left atrial appendage thrombus in patients with atrial fibrillation during COVID19 pandemic

Introduction The exclusion of left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus prior to urgent electrical cardioversion (DCCV) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is traditionally performed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). During the COVID19 pandemic, TEE was replaced by cardiac CT (CCT) due to its high aerosol generating property, which in addition to assessing the anatomy of the heart, can also be used to evaluate the coronary arteries at the same time. Methods In our retrospective study, we evaluated the cardiac CT scans of patients undergoing DCCV in our institution between January 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021 for coronary artery disease (CAD). The scans were performed by a GE Revolution 256-slice CT scanner. Results CCT scans were performed in 32 patients to rule out LAA thrombus (24 male;8 female;age: 61.8 ± 11.2 years;BMI: 29.2 ± 4.4;heart rate: 79.2 ± 24.4 1/min;CHA2DS2VASc score: 2.4 ± 1.5). The mean radiation exposure of the scans was DLP: 356.3 ± 130.1 mGy-cm;effective dose: 5.0 ±1.8 mSv, Ca-score: 361.4 ± 883.0. In 4 equivocal cases TEE was also performed with negative results. No CAD was confirmed in 7 cases, mild CAD in 14 patients. CCT was not diagnostic only in 4 cases. Significant (moderate or severe) CAD was detected in 7 cases, invasive coronary angiography (ICA) was also performed in 5 cases. In 2 cases significant one-vessel disease, in 2 other cases borderline (FFR: 0.81 and 0.84) stenosis and in 1 case only mild CAD was diagnosed by ICA. Conclusions: CCT scans performed by our 256-slice CT scanner for AF can identify patients, who require further invasive or invasive and functional coronary artery assessment with satisfactory accuracy. In terms of coronary artery disease, the non-diagnostic scan rate was low, despite the presence of arrhythmia, suboptimal heart rate and higher than usual Ca-score.

SAFETY AND CRITERIA FOR PERCUTANEOUS LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE OCCLUSION SAME DAY DISCHARGE

Background: Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) with the Watchman device is considered an elective procedure, and thus often deferred during outbreak peaks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with bleeding issues on anticoagulation may require additional hospitalization for bleeding episodes or suffering increased risk of stroke by postponing occlusion while anticoagulation is discontinued. We chose to develop a protocol for screening, same day discharge, and follow up of selected LAAO patients and continuing to provide quality clinical outcomes while accounting for decreased bed and staff capacity due to the pandemic. Methods: Utilizing Knowledge to Action (KTA) nursing framework, a protocol was developed and reviewed with key stakeholders. Criteria for Same Day Discharge (SDD) includes: support at home, stable vitals and access site hemostasis prior to DC, agreeable to SDD, tolerant of oral intake, ability to urinate and safely ambulate prior to DC. Exclusion for SDD includes: Liver disease, Plt count <70,000, ESRD or CKD IV or any site or procedure complications. With Perclose usage patients must have 3 hours of bedrest, with manual pressure closure must have bedrest for 6 hours and purse string suture removed. This is followed by a next day phone call to ensure the patient is taking appropriate medicines and have no medical issues. Results: 38 out of 113 patients were screened as SDD candidates from January 2021-October 2021. Average patient age was 76, 31% female, with average CHA2DS2-VASc of 5. One patient required overnight hospitalization due to underlying asthma and need for nebulizer. One patient presented to an outpatient ED on a weekend with chest pain and underwent heart catheterization due to elevated troponin and did not require intervention. There were no access site complications. No patients contracted SARS-Cov-2 within 6 weeks post procedurally, compared with 2 of the overnight stays during the same period (75 patients). Conclusion: SDD in a carefully selected patient population is a feasible and safe strategy for LAAO patients. These patients had a clinically significant, though underpowered decrease in incidence of COVID-19 diagnosis within 6 weeks post implant.

Prognostic value of semi-quantitative CT-based score integrated with cardiovascular risk factors during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic: A new score to predict poor outcome.

PURPOSE: Predicting the clinical course of COVID-19 pneumonia is of high clinical importance and may change treatment strategies. This study aimed to compare the semi-quantitative CT score (radiological score), mCHA2DS2-VASc score (clinical score), and R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score (clinical and radiological score) to predict the risk of ICU admission and mortality in COVID 19 pneumonia. METHODS: This study retrospectively evaluated 901 COVID-19 pneumonia cases with positive PCR results. The mCHA2DS2-VASc score was calculated based on clinical risk factors. CT images were evaluated, and the semi-quantitative CT scores were obtained. A new scoring method (R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score) was developed by combining these scores. The performance of the mCHA2DS2-VASc score, semi-quantitative CT score, and a combination of these scores (R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score) was evaluated using ROC analysis. RESULTS: The ROC curves of the semi-quantitative CT, mCHA2DS2-VASc, and R-mCHA2DS2-VASc scores were examined. The semi-quantitative CT, mCHA2DS2-VASc, and R-mCHA2DS2-VASc scores were significant in predicting intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality (p < 0.001). The R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score performed best in predicting a severe clinical course, and the cut-off value of 8 for the R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score had 83.9% sensitivity and 91.6% specificity for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The R-mCHA2DS2-VASc score includes both clinical and radiological parameters. It is a feasible scoring method for predicting a severe clinical course at an early stage with high sensitivity and specificity values. However, prospective studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.

Implementing, launching and sustaining a quality improvement initiative in the era of covid-19: Challenges and successes

Introduction: Only 60% of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with elevated stroke risk receive anticoagulation (AC). Closing this gap in AC use is particularly challenging in the face of the COVID19 pandemic. Electronic health record (EHR) alerts integrated into in-person and telehealth visits have the potential to close the gap. Hypothesis: A triad approach consisting of interventions at the practice provider at patient level could improve anticoagulation rates in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods: In collaboration with the Heart Rhythm Society Quality Improvement Committee and UMass, University of Florida (UFL) Jacksonville launched a 2020 quality improvement (QI) intervention, including several Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles, centered around an outpatient, electronic health record (EHR) alert linked to an order set for AC meds, labs, and specialty referrals. The alert fired when cardiologists or primary care physicians saw AF patients in clinic with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of ≥2 who were not on AC. Due to COVID-19, several of the PDSA interventions required adjustments due to redeployment of information technology staff mobilized to generate COVID-19 reports, a pivot for clinicians and patients to telehealth visits, and a change in clinician and patient priorities from routine cardiovascular/preventive care to COVID-19 diagnosis and prevention. To assess intervention effectiveness, the change in AC use as a function of time was measured using a weighted least squares linear regression. Results: At time of launch, 2357 of 3555 eligible patients (56.3%) were on AC. At study end, six months later, the percentage of patients on AC increased by 1.5% to 57.8 %. Based on the population of untreated patients at UFL and the stroke rate for untreated patients (available from large registry data), and assuming absence of any competing/secular trend to explain the growth in AC use, we calculated that a 1.5% increase in the AC treatment percentage could result in the prevention of 1.5 strokes over one year. Conclusion: We demonstrated that an EHR alert can raise the rate of AC use in patients with AF after several rounds of PDSAs. In future efforts, we plan to reassess the AC percentage in our population and confirm the sustainability of our QI efforts as attention focuses back from the pandemic to routine cardiovascular/ preventive care.

Identification of patients who can safely undergo same day discharge following atrial fibrillation ablation: Lessons learned in the COVID-19 era

Background: Historically, pts have been admitted for overnight observation following atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. The COVID-19 pandemic ushered the need to consider same day discharge (SDD). It remains unclear how to identify pts who can safely undergo SDD. Objective: To evaluate acute (within 4 hrs) and subacute (within 24 hrs) safety of SDD post AF ablation;we also sought to identify predictors of safe discharge. Methods: All pts undergoing AF ablation at our center following the end of the COVID imposed lockdown were enrolled. In each pt, ICE guided single transseptal puncture using the VersaCross® (Baylis) system was performed. Following ablation, protamine was not administered;all femoral venous access sites were closed with Vascade™ (Cardiva Medical) closure devices. Pts ambulated after 2 hrs of bedrest. Pts who had SDD were compared to those who stayed for overnight observation. Results: The cohort included 226 pts (65 ± 10 yrs, 157 [69%] male, 118 [52%] PAF, CHA2DS2 -VASc 2.4 ± 1.7). Cryo PVI was performed in 193 (85%) pts;34 (15%) pts had a redo procedure. SDD was attempted in 126 pts and successfully accomplished in 115 (91%) pts at 251 + 72 minutes from procedure end. The most common reason for failed SDD attempt was access site oozing necessitating additional bedrest. No SDD pt had a major complication. Overnight observation was performed in 100 (44%) pts, most commonly due to physician/pt preference. Compared to pts who had SDD, these pts were older and more likely to have heart failure and history of TIA/stroke. Oozing within the first 4 hrs was observed at a similar rate to SDD pts. A minor complication was seen in 1 pt each in SDD and overnight stay group between 4 and 24 hrs of ablation (Figure). Conclusions: Our study shows that when attempted, SDD after AF ablation can be accomplished in >90% of pts. Venous access site oozing was the greatest hinderance to pts going home. However, if pts had no issue 4 hrs after AF ablation, they had an uneventful course over the next 24 hrs. (Figure Presented).

Comparative performance of CHA2DS2VASc and anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation risk scores for predicting mortality in patients with COVID-19

Background: The AnTicoagulation and Risk factors in Atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) and CHA 2 DS 2 VASc risk scores used to detect the thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risk in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients has been shown recently to predict poor clinical outcomes varies clinical settings, regardless of having AF. We aimed to examine the potential utility of admission CHA 2 DS 2 VASc and ATRIA scores for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: In this retrospective study hospitalized 134 COVID-19 patients who diagnosed with a positive polymerase chain reaction test, were included. Patients were divided into two groups who were died and survivors, both the groups were compared according to clinical, laboratory, and demographic features, including the CHA 2 DS 2 VASc and ATRIA risk score. Predictors of mortality were determined by logistic regression analysis. Results: ATRIA and CHA 2 DS 2 VASc risk scores were predicting mortality in COVID-19 patients. Logistic regression analysis showed that ATRIA risk score, AF and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were an independent predictor of mortality. For an ATRIA score cut off value of 3, the sensitivity was 77.78%, specificity 57.94%, positive predictive value 31.80, and negative predictive value 91.20. For a CHA 2 DS 2 VASc score cut-off value of 4, the sensitivity was 44.44%, specificity 83.18%, positive predictive value 40, and negative predictive value 85.60. Conclusion: CHA 2 DS 2- VASc and ATRIA scores can be used as a novel, simple tool for predicting mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Risk Stratification for Acute Arterial and Venous Thromboembolism using CHA 2DS 2-VASc Score in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Multicenter Study

Introduction: Arterial and venous thromboembolism are common complications in COVID-19. Micro-macro thrombosis-related organ dysfunction can confer an increased risk for mortality. The optimal dosage of anticoagulation (AC) in COVID-19 patients remains unclear. Interim data from adaptive randomized control trials (ATTACC, REMAP-CAP, and ACTIV-4a) showed divergent results of therapeutic AC (TAC) versus usual care AC for the primary outcome of organ support free days in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Components of CHA 2DS 2-VASc, a model originally built for predicting ischemic stroke in atrial fibrillation, are consistent with independent risk factors for COVID-19 severity and mortality. Herein, we analyzed the performance of the CHA 2DS 2-VASc model in hospitalized COVID-19 patients for predicting arterial and venous thromboembolic events, which could potentially aid in risk stratification of hospitalized patients and guide AC dosing. Methods: This is a large, retrospective, multicenter cohort study that included all adult patients from one tertiary care and five community hospitals with PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection between 3/1/2020 and 12/1/2020. The primary composite outcome was acute arterial thromboembolism (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE). We identified patients with ATE [cerebrovascular accident (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI) including both ST-segment elevation MI and non-ST-segment elevation MI], and VTE [deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE)] using ICD -10 codes. Mean and standard deviation were reported for continuous variables;proportions were reported for categorical variables. To compare the groups, the Chi-square test was used for categorical variables, and the t-test was used for continuous variables. CHA 2DS 2-VASc scores were calculated on admission and were used as a measure of the predictive accuracy of the scoring system. Sensitivity and specificity with different cut-offs of CHA 2DS 2-VASc scores were calculated. All statistical tests were 2-sided with an α (significance) level of 0.05. All data were analyzed using R version 4.0.5. Results: Among 3526 patients, a total of 619 patients had thromboembolic events: 383 had ATE and 236 had VTE. Of 383 patients who had ATE, 350 patients were found to have acute MI, 48 had CVA, and 15 had both MI and CVA. In patients with VTE, 134 had DVT, 168 had PE, and 66 had both DVT and PE (Figure 1). We analyzed the primary composite outcome of ATE and VTE (group 1) vs no ATE and VTE (group 2). Baseline characteristics are included in Table 1. The in-patient all-cause mortality rate was 28.4% in group 1 vs 12.6% in group 2 (p<0.001). The mean hospital length of stay was 12.3 days in group 1 vs 8.8 days in group 2 (p<0.001). Group 1 had a mean CHA 2DS 2-VASc score of 3.3 ±1.6. vs 2.7±1.7 in group 2 (p<0.001) (Figure 2). At CHA 2DS 2-VASc scores of 3 and 4, the model had a specificity of 46% and 67% and sensitivity of 68% and 42% respectively for predicting ATE/VTE. The CHA 2DS 2-VASc score of 5 had a specificity of 86% and sensitivity of 25%. The score of 7 had 98% specificity but 3% sensitivity (Table 2). Conclusion: Our results suggest that the CHA 2DS 2-VASc model for arterial and venous thromboembolism has a moderate performance. The CHA 2DS 2-VASc score of 5 has a high specificity, though low sensitivity, for predicting thromboembolism. The CHA 2DS 2-VASc score can be used as an adjunct risk stratification tool to initiate TAC. [Formula presented] Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Modified CHA2DS2-VASc can predict mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to the emergency department

Introduction: CHA2DS2-VASc score is used to determine the thromboembolic risk, but its prognostic value has been demonstrated in several cardiovascular (CV) diseases. Except for female gender, many CV risk factors comprising this score are recognized as risk factors for mortality in COVID- 19. Cetinak G. et al demonstrated the ability of modified CHA2DS2-VASc (M-CHA2DS2-VASc) to predict mortality in COVID-19, which is based on changing gender criteria from female to male. Purpose: To evaluate the prognostic value of a M-CHA2DS2-VASc score to predict pulmonary embolism (PE) and mortality in pts with COVID-19 admitted at the emergency department (ED). Methods: Retrospective study of pts admitted to the ED between June 2020-January 2021, who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) due to PE suspicion. Pts were stratified into 3 MCHA2DS2- VASc risk groups: lower (0-1), intermediate (2-3) and high risk (≥4). Kruskal-Wallis and X-square test were used to compare score risk groups. Logistic regression was used to determine predictors of PE and mortality. ROC curve was performed to evaluate the discriminative power of the score. Results: We included 300 pts: median age 71 years, 59% male. Hypertension (59%) chronic kidney disease (CKD, 33%), dyslipidemia (32%) and diabetes (28%) were the most common comorbidities. PE was diagnosed in 46 pts (15%). We found no difference in PE incidence according to MCHA2DS2- VASc groups (p=0.531) and it showed no predictive value for PE (OR: 1.050, p=0.596). The AUC of M-CHA2DS2-VASc was 0.52, suggesting no discriminative power to predict PE. Regarding mortality, M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was higher in non-survivors COVID-19 pts than in survivors [4 (IQR 3-5) vs 2 (1-4), respectively, p<0.001]. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed for mortality based on M-CHA2DS2-VASC, troponin, CKD and smoking history, and only M-CHA2DS2-VASc was identified as an independent predictor of mortality (OR: 1.406, p=0.007). Kaplan-Meier showed that MCHA2DS2- VASc score was associated with mortality: the survival rate was 92%, 80% and 63% in the lower, intermediate and higher MCHA2DS2VASc score risk group (logrank test p<0.001;Fig. A). Most of the pts in the cohort were hospitalized (83%), but 21 pts (17%) discharged from the ED. Among these pts, 33% (n=17) had low risk, 37% (n=19) intermediate risk and 29% (n=15) high risk for mortality according to the M-CHA2DS2VASc score. The Kaplan-Meier individual survival analysis for hospitalized patients (Fig. B) and for those discharged from the ED (Fig. C) showed that M-CHA2DS2-VASc score had a good discriminative ability to predict short-term mortality for both groups (logrank test p<0.001 and p=0.007, respectively). Conclusion: Considering the lack of validated scores to predict mortality in COVID-19 pts, the M-CHA2DS2-VASc might be a simple tool to predict short-term mortality in these pts, irrespectively of the need for hospitalization or not.

CHA2DS2-VASc score and modified CHA2DS2-VASc score can predict mortality and intensive care unit hospitalization in COVID-19 patients.

In this study, we investigated whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score could be used to estimate the need for hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU), the length of stay in the ICU, and mortality in patients with COVID-19. Patients admitted to Merkezefendi State Hospital because of COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by RNA detection of virus by using polymerase chain reaction between March 24, 2020 and July 6, 2020, were screened retrospectively. The CHA2DS2-VASc and modified CHA2DS2-VASc score of all patients was calculated. Also, we received all patients' complete biochemical markers including D-dimer, Troponin I, and c-reactive protein on admission. We enrolled 1000 patients; 791 were admitted to the general medical service and 209 to the ICU; 82 of these 209 patients died. The ROC curves of the CHA2DS2-VASc and M-CHA2DS2-VASc scores were analyzed. The cut-off values of these scores for predicting mortality were ≥ 3 (2 or under and 3). The CHA2DS2-VASc and M-CHA2DS2-VASc scores had an area under the curve value of 0.89 on the ROC. The sensitivity and specificity of the CHA2DS2-VASc scores were 81.7% and 83.8%, respectively; the sensitivity and specificity of the M-CHA2DS2-VASc scores were 85.3% and 84.1%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that CHA2DS2-VASc, Troponin I, D-Dimer, and CRP were independent predictors of mortality in COVID-19 patients. Using a simple and easily available scoring system, CHA2DS2-VASc and M-CHA2DS2-VASc scores can be assessed in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. These scores can predict mortality and the need for ICU hospitalization in these patients.

New onset atrial fibrilation and risk faktors in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data concerning the prevalence of arrhythmias, particularly atrial fibrillation (AF), which may develop as a consequence of direct myocardial injury and the inflammatory state existing in COVID-19. METHODS: This single-center study included data concerning 658 COVID-19 patients, who were hospitalized in our institute, between April 20th, 2020 and July 30th, 2020. Demographic data, findings of the imaging studies, and laboratory test results were retrieved from the institutional digital database. RESULTS: New onset AF (NOAF) was identified in 33 patients (5%). Patients who developed AF were older (72.42 ± 6.10 vs 53.78 ± 13.80, p < 0.001) and had higher frequencies of hypertension and heart failure compared to patients without NOAF (p < 0.001, for both). The CHA2DS2-VASc score was higher in patients, who developed NOAF, compared to those who did not during hospitalization for COVID-19 (p < 0.001). Subjects, who developed NOAF during hospitalization, had a higher leukocyte count, neutrophil / lymphocyte ratio (NLR), C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and procalcitonin levels compared to those without NOAF (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Diffuse lung infiltration was also more frequent in COVID-19 patients, who developed NOAF, during hospitalization (p = 0.015). Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that age, CHA2DS2-VASc score, CRP, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and presence of diffuse lung infiltration on thorax CT were predictive for NOAF. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of NOAF in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is higher than the general population. Age, CHA2DS2-VASc score, C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and presence of diffuse lung infiltration on thorax CT may be used to identify patients at high risk for development of NOAF. Especially among these parameters, the presence of diffuse lung infiltration on thorax CT it was the most powerful independent predictor of NOAF development.