Effect of Routine Invasive vs Conservative Strategy in Older Adults With Frailty and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To our knowledge, no randomized clinical trial has compared the invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Objective: To compare outcomes of invasive and conservative strategies in frail, older patients with NSTEMI at 1 year. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted at 13 Spanish hospitals between July 7, 2017, and January 9, 2021, and included 167 older adult (≥70 years) patients with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥4) and NSTEMI. Data analysis was performed from April 2022 to June 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to routine invasive (coronary angiography and revascularization if feasible; n = 84) or conservative (medical treatment with coronary angiography for recurrent ischemia; n = 83) strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (DAOH) from discharge to 1 year. The coprimary end point was the composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, or postdischarge revascularization. Results: The study was prematurely stopped due to the COVID-19 pandemic when 95% of the calculated sample size had been enrolled. Among the 167 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 86 (5) years, and mean (SD) Clinical Frailty Scale score was 5 (1). While not statistically different, DAOH were about 1 month (28 days; 95% CI, -7 to 62) greater for patients managed conservatively (312 days; 95% CI, 289 to 335) vs patients managed invasively (284 days; 95% CI, 255 to 311; P = .12). A sensitivity analysis stratified by sex did not show differences. In addition, we found no differences in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.74-2.85; P = .28). There was a 28-day shorter survival in the invasive vs conservatively managed group (95% CI, -63 to 7 days; restricted mean survival time analysis). Noncardiac reasons accounted for 56% of the readmissions. There were no differences in the number of readmissions or days spent in the hospital after discharge between groups. Neither were there differences in the coprimary end point of ischemic cardiac events (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.54-1.57; P = .78). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of NSTEMI in frail older patients, there was no benefit to a routine invasive strategy in DAOH during the first year. Based on these findings, a policy of medical management and watchful observation is recommended for older patients with frailty and NSTEMI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03208153.

Clusters of inflammation in COVID-19: descriptive analysis and prognosis on more than 15,000 patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

Uncontrolled inflammation following COVID-19 infection is an important characteristic of the most seriously ill patients. The present study aims to describe the clusters of inflammation in COVID-19 and to analyze their prognostic role. This is a retrospective observational study including 15,691 patients with a high degree of inflammation. They were included in the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry from March 1, 2020 to May 1, 2021. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Hierarchical cluster analysis identified 7 clusters. C1 is characterized by lymphopenia, C2 by elevated ferritin, and C3 by elevated LDH. C4 is characterized by lymphopenia plus elevated CRP and LDH and frequently also ferritin. C5 is defined by elevated CRP, and C6 by elevated ferritin and D-dimer, and frequently also elevated CRP and LDH. Finally, C7 is characterized by an elevated D-dimer. The clusters with the highest in-hospital mortality were C4, C6, and C7 (17.4% vs. 18% vs. 15.6% vs. 36.8% vs. 17.5% vs. 39.3% vs. 26.4%). Inflammation clusters were found as independent factors for in-hospital mortality. In detail and, having cluster C1 as reference, the model revealed a worse prognosis for all other clusters: C2 (OR = 1.30, p = 0.001), C3 (OR = 1.14, p = 0.178), C4 (OR = 2.28, p < 0.001), C5 (OR = 1.07, p = 0.479), C6 (OR = 2.29, p < 0.001), and C7 (OR = 1.28, p = 0.001). We identified 7 groups based on the presence of lymphopenia, elevated CRP, LDH, ferritin, and D-dimer at the time of hospital admission for COVID-19. Clusters C4 (lymphopenia + LDH + CRP), C6 (ferritin + D-dimer), and C7 (D-dimer) had the worst prognosis in terms of in-hospital mortality.

WHO Ordinal Scale and Inflammation Risk Categories in COVID-19. Comparative Study of the Severity Scales.

BACKGROUND: The WHO ordinal severity scale has been used to predict mortality and guide trials in COVID-19. However, it has its limitations. OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare three classificatory and predictive models: the WHO ordinal severity scale, the model based on inflammation grades, and the hybrid model. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with patient data collected and followed up from March 1, 2020, to May 1, 2021, from the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. As this was a hospital-based study, the patients included corresponded to categories 3 to 7 of the WHO ordinal scale. Categories 6 and 7 were grouped in the same category. KEY RESULTS: A total of 17,225 patients were included in the study. Patients classified as high risk in each of the WHO categories according to the degree of inflammation were as follows: 63.8% vs. 79.9% vs. 90.2% vs. 95.1% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for WHO ordinal scale categories 3 to 6/7 was as follows: 0.8% vs. 24.3% vs. 45.3% vs. 34% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for the combined categories of ordinal scale 3a to 5b was as follows: 0.4% vs. 1.1% vs. 11.2% vs. 27.5% vs. 35.5% vs. 41.1% (p<0.001). The predictive regression model for in-hospital mortality with our proposed combined ordinal scale reached an AUC=0.871, superior to the two models separately. CONCLUSIONS: The present study proposes a new severity grading scale for COVID-19 hospitalized patients. In our opinion, it is the most informative, representative, and predictive scale in COVID-19 patients to date.

Does admission acetylsalicylic acid uptake in hospitalized COVID-19 patients have a protective role? Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is widely used in the treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disorders. Our objective is to evaluate its possible protective role, not only in mortality but also in other aspects such as inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We realized an observational retrospective cohort study of 20,641 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia collected and followed-up from Mar 1st, 2020 to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to determine whether treatment with ASA affected outcomes in COVID-19 patients. On hospital admission, 3291 (15.9%) patients were receiving ASA. After PSM, 3291 patients exposed to ASA and 2885 not-exposed patients were analyzed. In-hospital mortality was higher in the ASA group (30.4 vs. 16.9%, p < 0.001) in the global sample. After PSM, no differences were found between groups (30.4 vs. 30.3%, p = 0.938). There were no differences in inflammation, symptomatic thrombosis, or ICU admission. In conclusion, ASA intake is not associated with in-hospital mortality or any other health outcome evaluated after applying PSM analysis in a real-world large sample of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Beneficial and harmful outcomes of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The results of studies of tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contradictory. Our study aims to update medical evidence from controlled observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of TCZ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched the following databases from January 1, 2020 to April 13, 2021 (date of the last search): MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine and Scopus, using the terms ("COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "tocilizumab" [Supplementary Concept]). RESULTS: Sixty four studies were included in the present study: 54 were controlled observational studies (50 retrospective and 4 prospective) and 10 were RCTs. The overall results provided data from 20,616 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: 7668 patients received TCZ in addition to standard of care (SOC) (including 1915 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with reported mortality) and 12,948 patients only receiving SOC (including 4410 patients admitted to the ICU with reported mortality). After applying the random-effects model, the hospital-wide (including ICU) pooled mortality odds ratio (OR) of patients with COVID-19 treated with TCZ was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-0.93). The pooled hospital-wide mortality OR was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.74-2.18) in patients admitted at conventional wards versus 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59-0.76) in patients admitted to the ICU. The pooled OR of hospital-wide mortality (including ICU) of COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ plus corticosteroids (CS) was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.54-0.84). The pooled in-hospital mortality OR was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.35-1.42) when TCZ was early administered (≤10 days from symptom onset) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.48-1.45) for late administration (>10 days from symptom onset). The meta-analysis did not find significantly higher risk for secondary infections in COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ. CONCLUSIONS: TCZ prevented mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. This benefit was seen to a greater extent in patients receiving concomitant CS and when TCZ administration occurred within the first 10 days after symptom onset.

High-Dose Methylprednisolone Pulses for 3 Days vs. Low-Dose Dexamethasone for 10 Days in Severe, Non-Critical COVID-19: A Retrospective Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

Corticosteroids are largely recommended in patients with severe COVID-19. However, evidence to support high-dose methylprednisolone (MP) pulses is not as robust as that demonstrated for low-dose dexamethasone (DXM) in the RECOVERY trial. This is a retrospective cohort study on severe, non-critically ill patients with COVID-19, comparing 3-day MP pulses ≥ 100 mg/day vs. DXM 6 mg/day for 10 days. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were need of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was applied. From March 2020 to April 2021, a total of 2,284 patients were admitted to our hospital due to severe, non-critically ill COVID-19, and of these, 189 (8.3%) were treated with MP, and 493 (21.6%) with DXM. The results showed that patients receiving MP showed higher in-hospital mortality (31.2% vs. 17.8%, p < 0.001), need of ICU admission (29.1% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.017), need of IMV (25.9% vs. 13.8, p < 0.001), and median hospital length of stay (14 days vs. 11 days, p < 0.001). Our results suggest that treatment with low-dose DXM for 10 days is superior to 3 days of high-dose MP pulses in preventing in-hospital mortality and need for ICU admission or IMV in severe, non-critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Risk Categories in COVID-19 Based on Degrees of Inflammation: Data on More Than 17,000 Patients from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry.

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters.

VitaminD supplementation for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19: a position statement from the Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) produces severe respiratory symptoms such as bilateral pneumonia associated to a high morbidity and mortality, especially in patients of advanced age. Vitamin D deficiency has been reported in several chronic conditions associated with increased inflammation and dysregulation of the immune system. Vitamin D in modulates immune function too. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) is expressed by most immune cells, including B and T lymphocytes, monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells and the signalling of vitamin D and VDR together has an anti-inflammatory effect. Some studies have reported that vitamin D treatment could be useful for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 because vitamin D plays an important role as a modulator of immunocompetence. Over the last few months, some studies have hypothesized the possible beneficial effect of vitamin D supplementation in patients with COVID-19 in order to improve the immune balance and prevent the hyperinflammatory cytokine storm. Some preliminary studies have already shown promising results with vitamin D supplementation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D should be administered daily until adequate levels are achieved due to vitamin D behaves as a negative acute phase reactant (APR). Despite the lack of evidence on specific doses of vitamin D to treat COVID-19 in older adults, authors consider it is necessary to standardize the use in clinical practice. These recommendations advice supplement vitamin D in a protocoled fashion based on expert opinions, level of evidence 5.

[Coronavirus: the geriatric emergency of 2020. Joint document of the Section on Geriatric Cardiology of the Spanish Society of Cardiology and the Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology]. / Coronavirus: la emergencia geriátrica de 2020. Documento conjunto de la Sección de Cardiología Geriátrica de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología y la Sociedad Española de Geriatría y Gerontología.

SARS-CoV-2 infection, also known as COVID-19 (coronavirus infectious disease-19), was first identified in December 2019. In Spain, the first case of this infection was diagnosed on 31 January, 2020 and, by 15 April 2020, has caused 18 579 deaths, especially in the elderly. Due to the rapidly evolving situation regarding this disease, the data reported in this article may be subject to modifications. The older population are particularly susceptible to COVID-19 infection and to developing severe disease. The higher morbidity and mortality rates in older people have been associated with comorbidity, especially cardiovascular disease, and frailty, which weakens the immune response. Due to both the number of affected countries and the number of cases, the current situation constitutes an ongoing pandemic and a major health emergency. Because Spain has one of the largest older populations in the world, COVID-19 has emerged as a geriatric emergency. This document has been prepared jointly between the Section on Geriatric Cardiology of the Spanish Society of Cardiology and the Spanish Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology.

Beneficial effect of corticosteroids in preventing mortality in patients receiving tocilizumab to treat severe COVID-19 illness.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the characteristics and risk factors for mortality in patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) treated with tocilizumab (TCZ), alone or in combination with corticosteroids (CS). METHODS: From March 17 to April 7, 2020, a real-world observational retrospective analysis of consecutive hospitalized adult patients receiving TCZ to treat severe COVID-19 was conducted at our 750-bed university hospital. The main outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,092 patients with COVID-19 were admitted during the study period. Of them, 186 (17%) were treated with TCZ, of which 129 (87.8%) in combination with CS. Of the total 186 patients, 155 (83.3 %) patients were receiving noninvasive ventilation when TCZ was initiated. Mean time from symptoms onset and hospital admission to TCZ use was 12 (±4.3) and 4.3 days (±3.4), respectively. Overall, 147 (79%) survived and 39 (21%) died. By multivariate analysis, mortality was associated with older age (HR = 1.09, p < 0.001), chronic heart failure (HR = 4.4, p = 0.003), and chronic liver disease (HR = 4.69, p = 0.004). The use of CS, in combination with TCZ, was identified as a protective factor against mortality (HR = 0.26, p < 0.001) in such severe COVID-19 patients receiving TCZ. No serious superinfections were observed after a 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe COVID-19 receiving TCZ due to systemic host-immune inflammatory response syndrome, the use of CS in addition to TCZ therapy, showed a beneficial effect in preventing in-hospital mortality.