Coronary microvascular health in symptomatic patients with prior COVID-19 infection: an updated analysis.

AIMS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with endothelial dysfunction. We aimed to determine the effects of prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the coronary microvasculature accounting for time from COVID-19, disease severity, SARS-CoV-2 variants, and in subgroups of patients with diabetes and those with no known coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cases consisted of patients with previous COVID-19 who had clinically indicated positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and were matched 1:3 on clinical and cardiovascular risk factors to controls having no prior infection. Myocardial flow reserve (MFR) was calculated as the ratio of stress to rest myocardial blood flow (MBF) in mL/min/g of the left ventricle. Comparisons between cases and controls were made for the odds and prevalence of impaired MFR (MFR < 2). We included 271 cases matched to 815 controls (mean ± SD age 65 ± 12 years, 52% men). The median (inter-quartile range) number of days between COVID-19 infection and PET imaging was 174 (58-338) days. Patients with prior COVID-19 had a statistically significant higher odds of MFR <2 (adjusted odds ratio 3.1, 95% confidence interval 2.8-4.25 P < 0.001). Results were similar in clinically meaningful subgroups. The proportion of cases with MFR <2 peaked 6-9 months from imaging with a statistically non-significant downtrend afterwards and was comparable across SARS-CoV-2 variants but increased with increasing severity of infection. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of impaired MFR is similar by duration of time from infection up to 1 year and SARS-CoV-2 variants, but significantly differs by severity of infection.

The Role of Cardiac PET in Diagnosis and Prognosis of Ischemic Heart Disease: Optimal Modality Across Different Patient Populations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) being the most used nuclear imaging technique for diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD), many now consider positron emission tomography (PET) as a superior modality. This review will focus on the advances of cardiac PET in recent years and its advantages compared to SPECT in diagnosis and prognosis of CAD. RECENT FINDINGS: PET's higher resolution and enhanced diagnostic accuracy, as well as lower radiation exposure, all help explain the rationale for its wider spread and use. PET also allows for measurement of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR), which aids in several different clinical scenarios, such as diagnosing multivessel disease or identifying non-responders. PET has also been shown to be useful in diagnosing CAD in various specific populations, such as patients with prior COVID-19 infection, cardiac transplant, and other comorbidities.

Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and the Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection or Hospitalization With COVID-19 Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infects its target cells via angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor, a membrane-bound protein found on the surface of many human cells. Treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptors blockers (ARB) has been shown to increase angiotensin converting enzyme 2 expression by up to 5-fold. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: These findings coupled with observations of the high prevalence and mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with underlying cardiovascular disease have led to a speculation that ACEIs/ARBs may predispose to higher risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature and performed a meta-analysis of the association between prior use of ACEIs and ARBs and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCES: We searched Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, Scopus, and Medrxiv.org preprint server until June 18, 2020. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Ten studies (6 cohorts and 4 case control) that enrolled a total of 23,892 patients and 853,369 controls were eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. One study was excluded from the analysis because of high risk of bias. Prior use of ACEIs was not associated with an increased risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease, odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval (0.91-1.05), I2 = 15%. Similarly, prior use of ARBs was not associated with an increased risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2, odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval (0.98-1.10), I2 = 0%. CONCLUSION: Cumulative evidence suggests that prior use of ACEIs or ARBs is not associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 or hospitalization due to COVID-19 disease. Our results provide a reassurance to the public not to discontinue prescribed ACEIs/ARBs because of fear of COVID-19.

Noninvasive Imaging for Patients with COVID-19 and Acute Chest Pain

Acute chest pain is a common presentation in patients with COVID-19. Although noninvasive cardiac imaging modalities continue to be important cornerstones of management, the pandemic has brought forth difficult and unprecedented challenges in the provision of timely care while ensuring the safety of patients and providers. Clinical practice has adapted to these challenges, with several recommendations and societal guidelines emerging on the appropriate use of imaging modalities. In this review, we summarize the current evidence base on the use of noninvasive cardiac imaging modalities in COVID-19 patients with acute chest pain, with a focus on acute coronary syndromes.

Acute and Subclinical Myocardial Injury in COVID-19

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic that, at the time of this writing, has led to 178,000,000 cases worldwide and more than 3,875,000 deaths. Cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 have become the focus of investigation after many hospitalized COVID-19 patients—with or without established cardiovascular disease—incurred clinical or subclinical myocardial injury, including isolated biomarker elevations, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, heart failure, myocarditis, and cardiogenic shock. In this review, we highlight the most recent evidence of the prevalence and potential etiologies of acute and subclinical myocardial injury in COVID-19 patients.

The Way Ahead: Life After COVID-19

Much has changed in the 2 years since the start of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. The need for social distancing catalyzed the digitization of healthcare delivery and medical education—from telemedicine and virtual conferences to online residency/fellowship interviews. Vaccine development, particularly in the field of mRNA technology, led to widespread availability of safe and effective vaccines. With improved survival from acute infection, the healthcare system is dealing with the ever-growing cohort of patients with lingering symptoms. In addition, social media platforms have fueled a plethora of misinformation campaigns that have adversely affected prevention and control measures. In this review, we examine how COVID-19 has reshaped the healthcare system, and gauge its potential effects on life after the pandemic.

Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Mortality Among COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are known to increase the expression of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor, which has been shown to be the receptor for the acute severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Based on these observations, speculations raised the concerns that ACEIs/ARBs users would be more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and would be at higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease and death. Therefore, we systematically reviewed the literature and performed a meta-analysis of the association between prior use of ACEIs and ARBs and mortality due to COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search of several databases from November 2019 to June 18, 2020 was conducted. The databases included Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus. Medrxiv.org was also searched for unpublished data. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: Nine studies with a total of 18,833 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 met our eligibility criteria. Prior use of ACEIs and/or ARBs was associated with reduced mortality among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, with a pooled adjusted relative risk (aRR) from 6 studies of 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.42-0.94) (I = 65%). Three studies reported separately on ACEIs or ARBs and their association with survival among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, with a pooled adjusted relative risk of 0.78, 95% CI (0.58-1.04) (I = 0%) and 0.97, 95% CI (0.73-1.30) (I = 0%) respectively. The results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that use of ACEIs/ARBs is associated with a decreased risk of death among SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. This finding provides a reassurance to the public not to stop prescribed ACEIs/ARBs because of fear of severe COVID-19.

Cardiac Toxicity of Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature and to estimate the risk of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cardiac toxicity in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We searched multiple data sources including PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science and medrxiv.org from November 2019 through May 27, 2020. We included studies that enrolled patients with COVID-19 treated with CQ or HCQ, with or without azithromycin, and reported on cardiac toxic effects. We performed a meta-analysis using the arcsine transformation of the different incidences. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies with a total of 5652 patients were included. The pooled incidence of torsades de pointes arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest was 3 per 1000 (95% CI, 0-21; I 2 =96%) in 18 studies with 3725 patients. Among 13 studies of 4334 patients, the pooled incidence of discontinuation of CQ or HCQ due to prolonged QTc or arrhythmias was 5% (95% CI, 1-11; I 2 =98%). The pooled incidence of change in QTc from baseline of 60 milliseconds or more or QTc of 500 milliseconds or more was 9% (95% CI, 3-17; I 2 =97%). Mean or median age, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes, concomitant QT-prolonging medications, intensive care unit admission, and severity of illness in the study populations explained between-studies heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with COVID-19 with CQ or HCQ is associated with an important risk of drug-induced QT prolongation and relatively higher incidence of torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest. Therefore, these agents should not be used routinely in the management of COVID-19 disease. Patients with COVID-19 who are treated with antimalarials for other indications should be adequately monitored.