All-cause and in-hospital mortality after aspirin use in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: With the results of the largest randomized controlled trial (RECOVERY) and the most extensive retrospective cohort study on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) recently published, we performed a meta-analysis on the association of aspirin with mortality of COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the role of aspirin in COVID-19 hospitalizations. Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases for studies from 1 January 2020 until 20 July 2022, that compared aspirin versus non-aspirin use in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We excluded case reports, review articles and studies on non-hospitalized COVID-19 infections. We used the inverse variance method and random effects model to pool the individual studies. Results: Ten observational studies and one randomized controlled trial met the criteria for inclusion. There were 136 695 total patients, of which 27 168 were in the aspirin group and 109 527 were in the non-aspirin group. Aspirin use was associated with a 14% decrease in all-cause mortality compared with non-aspirin use in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 [relative risk (RR) 0.86, confidence interval (95% CI) 0.76-0.97; P = 0.002; I 2 =64%]. Among subgroups of studies reporting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 hospitalizations, aspirin use was associated with a 16% decrease in in-hospital mortality compared with non-aspirin use (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99; P = 0.007; I 2 =64%). Conclusion: Our study shows that aspirin decreases in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Further studies are needed to assess which COVID-19 patient populations benefit most, such as patients on aspirin for primary versus secondary prevention of atherosclerotic disease. In addition, significant bleeding also needs to be considered when assessing the risk-benefit of aspirin use.

COVID-19 Positive Status is Associated with Increased In-hospital Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) may have concomitant positive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to compare the risk of in-hospital mortality in patients primarily hospitalized for AMI with or without concomitant COVID-19 positive status. Using the random-effects model, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published articles from December 1, 2019, to April 1, 2022. There were eight studies with 10,128 patients, including 612 patients with COVID and 9516 patients without COVID. A total of 261 patients (42.64%) with COVID-19 positive and 612 patients (6.43%) with negative COVID-19 status died in the hospital. Pooled data showed that patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI with COVID-19 infection had more than five times increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to patients without COVID-19 (OR: 5.06, 95% CI: 3.61, 7.09; I2 = 35%, P < 0.001). However, pooled data from five studies with adjustment of baseline differences in patient demographics and characteristics, comorbidities, and in-hospital pharmacology revealed more than three times increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to patients who had primary AMI without COVID-19 infection (aOR: 3.47, 95% CI: 2.21, 5.45; I2 = 0%, P < 0.001). In subgroup analysis, ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) had lower in-hospital mortality (OR 4.23, 95% CI: 3.31, 5.40; I2 = 0%, P < 0.001) compared to non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) (OR 9.97, 95% CI: 5.71, 17.41; I2 = 0%, P < 0.001) (p-value = 0.006). Our study shows that COVID-19 infection is associated with increased in-hospital mortality in patients with index hospitalization for AMI.

Silent Myocardial Infarction and Acute Multiorgan Failure in a COVID-19 Patient: A Case Report.

Silent myocardial infarction or unrecognized myocardial infarction has increased prevalence in elderly population with increased cardiovascular risk factors. However, its prevalence in COVID-19 patients is not well-known. A 77-year-old Caucasian male with COVID-19 pneumonia, presented with silent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, diabetic ketoacidosis and multiorgan failure. He underwent cardiac catheterization and drug eluting stent placement in the ostial right coronary artery with safety protocol. He was discharged to extended-care-facility in stable condition. This is a first case report of silent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in a patient presenting with COVID-19. In patients with COVID-19, acute myocardial infarction should be ruled out even when asymptomatic, especially in older patients. Prompt intervention using safety protocol is life-saving.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Can We Compare Direct Oral Anticoagulants to Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Bio-Prosthetic Valves?

Background There are no clear consensus guidelines on the indications and types of anticoagulation therapies in patients with bio-prosthetic valves either with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) or sinus rhythm. In our meta-analysis, we assessed the safety and efficacy of DOACs as compared to the standard treatment with warfarin in patients with AF and bioprosthetic valves. Methods We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies in the English language, and studies reporting patients with valvular heart disease that included bioprosthetic valvular disease. A systematic literature review using Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science was performed using the terms "Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant," "Oral Anticoagulants," "Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant," "Atrial Fibrillation," "Bioprosthetic Valve" for literature published prior to January 2021. Extraction of data from included studies was carried out independently by three reviewers from Covidence. We assessed the methodical rigor of the included studies using the modified Downs and Black checklist. Results Four RCTs and one observational study (n=1776) were included in our study. A random-effect model using RevMan (version 5.4; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen) was used for data analysis. The pooled data showed that there was a non-significant reduction in the incidence of stroke and systemic embolism in the patients taking DOACs as compared to warfarin (HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.29, 1.67; I2 = 50%). The incidence of major bleeding was lower in the DOACs group; the difference was statistically significant (HR 0.42; 95% CI, 0.26, 0.67; I2 = 7%). The difference was not statistically significant for all-cause mortality in both groups (HR 1.24; 95% CI, 0.91, 1.67; I2 = 0%). Conclusion Our results showed that there was no difference in the outcomes of stroke and systemic embolism between DOACs and warfarin but there were statistically significantly lower major bleeding events. We conclude that larger clinical trials are needed to assess the true safety and efficacy of DOACs in patients with AF and bioprosthetic valves.

Does Social Stigma and Neglect Post-COVID-19 Matter? A Case Report on Brief Psychotic Disorder Post-COVID-19 and Self-Quarantine.

Social stigma and neglect post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and self-quarantine can be associated with a brief psychotic disorder (BPD). A 53-year-old African-American man with no significant past medical and psychiatric history was brought to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of persecutory delusions post COVID-19 and self-quarantine. His symptoms included false beliefs that people were plotting to kill him which made him combative at work and home. As his symptoms worsened, his wife brought him to the hospital. He was given intramuscular haloperidol 5 mg one dose in the ED. The Clinical Health Psychology and Psychiatry team diagnosed the patient with BPD as per the Diagnostic and Statistical Method of Mental Disorder Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Over the next few days, his symptoms slowly improved. At follow-up visit in the outpatient clinic in a week, we found him back to his baseline without any delusional thoughts. Increased stressors post COVID-19, neglect at home, and social stigmata at work associated with COVID-19 along with his individual vulnerability appeared to be the cause of his delusions but various other mechanisms may exist. Our case raises the question: does social stigma and neglect post-COVID-19 and self-quarantine matter?