Mechanical circulatory support in ventricular arrhythmias.

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.

Oxidative stress-induced endothelial dysfunction and decreased vascular nitric oxide in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 targets endothelial cells through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor. The resulting endothelial injury induces widespread thrombosis and microangiopathy. Nevertheless, early specific markers of endothelial dysfunction and vascular redox status in COVID-19 patients are currently missing. METHODS: Observational study including ICU and non-ICU adult COVID-19 patients admitted in hospital for acute respiratory failure, compared with control subjects matched for cardiovascular risk factors similar to ICU COVID-19 patients, and ICU septic shock patients unrelated to COVID-19. FINDINGS: Early SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with an imbalance between an exacerbated oxidative stress (plasma peroxides levels in ICU patients vs. controls: 1456.0 ± 400.2 vs 436 ± 272.1 mmol/L; P < 0.05) and a reduced nitric oxide bioavailability proportional to disease severity (5-α-nitrosyl-hemoglobin, HbNO in ICU patients vs. controls: 116.1 ± 62.1 vs. 163.3 ± 46.7 nmol/L; P < 0.05). HbNO levels correlated with oxygenation parameters (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) in COVID-19 patients (R2 = 0.13; P < 0.05). Plasma levels of angiotensin II, aldosterone, renin or serum level of TREM-1 ruled out any hyper-activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system or leucocyte respiratory burst in ICU COVID-19 patients, contrary to septic patients. INTERPRETATION: Endothelial oxidative stress with ensuing decreased NO bioavailability appears as a likely pathogenic factor of endothelial dysfunction in ICU COVID-19 patients. A correlation between NO bioavailability and oxygenation parameters is observed in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. These results highlight an urgent need for oriented research leading to a better understanding of the specific endothelial oxidative stress that occurs during SARS-CoV-2. FUNDING: Stated in the acknowledgments section.