Aspirin for Primary Prevention in Patients With Elevated Coronary Artery Calcium Score: A Systematic Review of Current Evidences.

The 2019 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines regarding low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) indicate an increased risk of bleeding without a net benefit. The coronary artery calcium (CAC) score could be used to guide aspirin therapy in high-risk patients without an increased risk of bleeding. With this systematic review, we aimed to analyze studies that have investigated the role of CAC in primary prevention with aspirin. A total of 4 relevant studies were identified and the primary outcomes of interest were bleeding events and major adverse cardiac events. The outcomes of interest were stratified into 3 groups based on CAC scoring: 0, 1 to 99, and ≥100. A study concluded from 2,191 patients that with a low bleeding risk, CAC ≥100, and ASCVD risk ≥5% aspirin confers a net benefit, whereas patients with a high bleeding risk would experience a net harm, irrespective of ASCVD risk or CAC. All other studies demonstrated net benefit in patients with CAC ≥100 with a clear benefit. CAC scores correspond to calcified plaque in coronary vessels and are associated with graded increase in adverse cardiovascular events. Our review has found that in the absence of a significant bleeding risk, increased ASCVD risk and CAC score corelate with increased benefit from aspirin. A study demonstrated a decrease in the odds of myocardial infarction from 3 to 0.56 in patients on aspirin. The major drawback of aspirin for primary prevention is the bleeding complication. At present, there is no widely validated tool to predict the bleeding risk with aspirin, which creates difficulties in accurately delineating risk. Barring some discrepancy between studies, evidence shows a net harm for the use of aspirin in low ASCVD risk (<5%), irrespective of CAC score.

Burden of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke Across the US From 1990 to 2019.

Importance: Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability in the US. Accurate and updated measures of stroke burden are needed to guide public health policies. Objective: To present burden estimates of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in the US in 2019 and describe trends from 1990 to 2019 by age, sex, and geographic location. Design, Setting, and Participants: An in-depth cross-sectional analysis of the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study was conducted. The setting included the time period of 1990 to 2019 in the US. The study encompassed estimates for various types of strokes, including all strokes, ischemic strokes, intracerebral hemorrhages (ICHs), and subarachnoid hemorrhages (SAHs). The 2019 Global Burden of Disease results were released on October 20, 2020. Exposures: In this study, no particular exposure was specifically targeted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary focus of this analysis centered on both overall and age-standardized estimates, stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and DALYs per 100 000 individuals. Results: In 2019, the US recorded 7.09 million prevalent strokes (4.07 million women [57.4%]; 3.02 million men [42.6%]), with 5.87 million being ischemic strokes (82.7%). Prevalence also included 0.66 million ICHs and 0.85 million SAHs. Although the absolute numbers of stroke cases, mortality, and DALYs surged from 1990 to 2019, the age-standardized rates either declined or remained steady. Notably, hemorrhagic strokes manifested a substantial increase, especially in mortality, compared with ischemic strokes (incidence of ischemic stroke increased by 13% [95% uncertainty interval (UI), 14.2%-11.9%]; incidence of ICH increased by 39.8% [95% UI, 38.9%-39.7%]; incidence of SAH increased by 50.9% [95% UI, 49.2%-52.6%]). The downturn in stroke mortality plateaued in the recent decade. There was a discernible heterogeneity in stroke burden trends, with older adults (50-74 years) experiencing a decrease in incidence in coastal areas (decreases up to 3.9% in Vermont), in contrast to an uptick observed in younger demographics (15-49 years) in the South and Midwest US (with increases up to 8.4% in Minnesota). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the declining age-standardized stroke rates over the past 3 decades suggest progress in managing stroke-related outcomes. However, the increasing absolute burden of stroke, coupled with a notable rise in hemorrhagic stroke, suggests an evolving and substantial public health challenge in the US. Moreover, the significant disparities in stroke burden trends across different age groups and geographic locations underscore the necessity for region- and demography-specific interventions and policies to effectively mitigate the multifaceted and escalating burden of stroke in the country.

Transcatheter versus surgical mitral valve repair in patients with mitral regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of transcatheter and surgical mitral valve repair (SMVr) in primary mitral regurgitation (MR) and MR with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used the Nationwide Readmission Database to identify primary MR and MR with HFrEF patients who underwent transcatheter or SMVr from 2016 to 2019. A propensity score with 1:1 matching was applied. The primary outcome was a cumulative event rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, cardiac arrest and mitral valve replacement. Other important secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 2187 matched pairs were found in the primary MR cohort and 2178 matched pairs were found in the MR-HFrEF cohort. Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) had significantly higher medium-term MACE compared with SMVr in both cohorts (primary MR: hazard ratio: 1.73, 95% confidence interval: 1.33-2.26, P ≤ 0.001; MR-HFrEF: hazard ratio: 2.00, 95% confidence interval: 1.58-2.54, P ≤ 0.001). TMVr showed similar in-hospital mortality in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Although TMVr showed better short-term outcomes, it had significantly higher medium-term MACE than SMVr in both cohorts. Thus, shared decision-making should be performed for TMVr after discussing the benefits and risks in patients who can undergo SMVr.

In-hospital Outcomes of Aspiration Pneumonia Hospitalizations With Acute Heart Failure: A Nationwide Analysis.

Background and Objectives: There is a paucity of data regarding the impact of acute heart failure (AHF) on the outcomes of aspiration pneumonia (AP). Methods: Using National Inpatient Sample datasets (2016 to 2019), we identified admissions for AP with AHF vs. without AHF using relevant International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes. We compared the demographics, comorbidities, and outcomes between the two groups. Results: Out of the 121,097,410 weighted adult hospitalizations, 488,260 had AP, of which 13.25% (n=64,675) had AHF. The AHF cohort consisted predominantly of the elderly (mean age 80.4 vs. 71.1 years), females (47.8% vs. 42.2%), and whites (81.6% vs. 78.5%) than non-AHF cohort (all p<0.001). Complicated diabetes and hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, chronic pulmonary disease, and prior myocardial infarction were more frequent in AHF than in the non-AHF cohort. AP-AHF cohort had similar adjusted odds of all-cause mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-1.03; p=0.122), acute respiratory failure (AOR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13; p=0.379), but higher adjusted odds of cardiogenic shock (AOR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.30-3.64; p=0.003), and use of mechanical ventilation (MV) (AOR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.17-1.56; p<0.001) compared to AP only cohort. AP-AHF cohort more frequently required longer durations of MV and hospital stays with a higher mean cost of the stay. Conclusions: Our study from a nationally representative database demonstrates an increased morbidity burden, worsened complications, and higher hospital resource utilization, although a similar risk of all-cause mortality in AP patients with AHF vs. no AHF.

Prognostic Value of Hospital Frailty Risk Score and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Revascularization for Critical Limb-Threatening Ischemia.

Background The impact of medical record-based frailty assessment on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revascularization for critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) is unknown. Methods and Results This study included patients with CLTI aged ≥18 years from the nationwide readmissions database 2016 to 2018 who underwent endovascular revascularization (ER) or surgical revascularization (SR). The hospital frailty risk score, a previously validated International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) claims-based score, was used to categorize patients into low- (<5), intermediate- (5-15), and high-risk (>15) frailty categories. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and major amputation at 6 months. A total of 64 338 patients were identified who underwent ER (82.3%) or SR (17.7%) for CLTI. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 69.3 (11.8) years, and 63% of patients were male. This study found a nonlinear association between hospital frailty risk score and in-hospital mortality and 6-month major amputation. In both ER and SR cohorts, the intermediate- and high-risk groups were associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital mortality (high-risk group: ER: odds ratio [OR], 7.2 [95% CI, 4.4-11.6], P<0.001; SR: OR, 28.6 [95% CI, 3.4-237.6], P=0.002) and major amputation at 6 months (high-risk group: ER: hazard ratio [HR], 1.6 [95% CI, 1.5-1.7], P<0.001; SR: HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4-2.2], P<0.001) compared with the low-risk group. Conclusions The hospital frailty risk score, generated from the medical record, can identify frailty and predict in-hospital mortality and 6-month major amputation in patients undergoing ER or SR for CLTI. Further studies are needed to assess if this score can be incorporated into clinical decision-making in patients undergoing revascularization for CLTI.

Causes and Predictors of 30-Day Readmission in Patients With COVID-19 and ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the United States: A Nationwide Readmission Database Analysis.

Background Rates, causes, and predictors of readmission in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) during COVID-19 pandemic are unknown. Methods and Results All hospitalizations for STEMI were selected from the US Nationwide Readmissions Database 2020 and were stratified by the presence of COVID-19. Primary outcome was 30-day readmission. Multivariable hierarchical generalized logistic regression analysis was performed to compare 30-day readmission between patients with STEMI with and without COVID-19 and to identify the predictors of 30-day readmissions in patients with STEMI and COVID-19. The rate of 30-day all-cause readmission was 11.4% in patients with STEMI who had COVID-19 and 10.6% in those without COVID-19, with the adjusted odds ratio (OR) not being significantly different between the two groups (OR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.73-1.07], P=0.200). Of all 30-day readmissions in patients with STEMI and COVID-19, 41% were for cardiac causes. Among the cardiac causes, 56% were secondary to acute coronary syndrome, while among the noncardiac causes, infections were the most prevalent. Among the causes of 30-day readmissions, infectious causes were significantly higher for patients with STEMI who had COVID-19 compared with those without COVID-19 (29.9% versus 11.3%, P=0.001). In a multivariable model, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, low median household income, and length of stay ≥5 days were found to be associated with an increased risk of 30-day readmission. Conclusions Post-STEMI, 30-day readmission rates were similar between patients with and without COVID-19. Cardiac causes were the most common causes for 30-day readmissions, and infections were the most prevalent noncardiac causes.

Impact of Gender, Race, and Insurance Status on Inhospital Management and Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (a Nationwide Analysis).

There is a paucity of data exploring the impact of gender, race, and insurance status on invasive management and inhospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the United States. The National Inpatient Sample database for the year 2020 was queried to identify all adult hospitalizations with STEMI and concurrent COVID-19. A total of 5,990 patients with COVID-19 with STEMI were identified. Women had 31% lower odds of invasive management and 32% lower odds of coronary revascularization than men. Black patients had lower odds of invasive management (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 0.85, p = 0.004) than White patients. Black and Asian patients had lower odds of percutaneous coronary intervention (Black: OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.80, p = 0.002; Asian: OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85, p = 0.018) than White patients. Uninsured patients had higher odds of getting percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.98, p = 0.031) and lower odds of inhospital mortality (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.89, p = 0.023) than privately insured patients. Patients with out-of-hospital STEMI had 19 times higher odds of invasive management and 80% lower odds of inhospital mortality than inhospital STEMI. In conclusion, we note important gender and racial disparities in invasive management of patients with COVID-19 with STEMI. Surprisingly, uninsured patients had higher revascularization rates and lower mortality than privately insured patients.

Clinical outcomes of MANTA vs suture-based vascular closure devices after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: A recently published randomized control trial showed different results with suture-based vascular closure device (VCD) than plug-based VCD in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The learning curve for MANTA device is steep, while the learning curve for suture based VCD is shallow as the devices are quite different. In this meta-analysis, we have compared suture-based (ProGlide and Prostar XL) vs plug-based VCDs (MANTA). METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of all published studies (using PubMed/Medline and Cochrane databases) reporting the clinical outcome of plug-based vs suture-based VCDs in transfemoral TAVR patients. RESULTS: We included nine studies with a total of 2865 patients (plug-based n = 1631, suture-based n = 1234). There was no significant difference in primary outcome of all bleeding when using plug-based as opposed to suture-based VCDs (RR 1.14 [0.62-2.06] I2 = 72%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of secondary outcomes between two groups including major life threatening bleeding (RR 1.16 [0.38-3.58] I2 = 65%), major vascular complications (RR 0.84 [0.35-2.00] I2 = 55%), minor vascular complications (RR 1.05 [0.56-1.95] I2 = 42%), pseudo aneurysm (RR 1.84 [0.11-29.98] I2 = 44%), stenosis-dissection (RR 0.98 [0.66-1.47] I2 = 0%), VCD failure (RR 1.71 [0.96-3.04] I2 = 0%), and blood transfusion (RR 1.01 [0.38-2.71], I2 = 61%). CONCLUSION: Large bore arteriotomy closure with plug-based VCD was not superior to suture-based VCDs in this transfemoral TAVR population. There was very frequent use of secondary VCDs in suture-based VCD group which is not practical when using MANTA. Additional high-powered studies are required to determine the safety and efficacy of MANTA device.

Prevalence, trends, and outcomes of cardiovascular diseases in pregnant patients in the USA: 2010-19.

AIMS: Contemporary data on the prevalence, trends, and outcomes of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in pregnant patients are limited. This study aimed to analyse the prevalence, trends, and outcomes of CVD and their subtypes in hospitalized pregnant patients in the USA. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective population-based cohort study used the Nationwide Readmission Database to identify all hospitalized pregnant patients from 1 January 2010, to 31 December 2019. Data analyses were conducted from January to February 2022. Pregnancy-associated hospitalizations were identified. The main outcomes were the prevalence and trend of CVD in pregnant patients. 39 212 104 hospitalized pregnant patients were identified: 4 409 924 with CVD (11.3%) and 34 802 180 without CVD (88.8%). The annual age-adjusted CVD prevalence increased from 9.2% in 2010 to 14.8% in 2019 (P < 0.001). Hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (1069/10 000) was the most common, and aortic dissection (0.1/10 000) was the least common CVD. The trends of all CVD subtypes increased; however, the trend of valvular heart disease decreased. Age-adjusted in-hospital all-cause mortality was 8.2/10 000 in CVD, but its trend decreased from 8.1/10 000 in 2010 to 6.5/10 000 in 2019 (P < 0.001). CVD was associated with 15.51 times higher odds of in-hospital all-cause mortality compared with non-CVD patients [odds ratio (OR): 15.51, 95% confidence interval (CI)13.22-18.20, P < 0.001]. CVD was associated with higher 6-week postpartum readmission (OR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.95-1.99), myocardial infarction (OR: 3.04, 95% CI: 2.57-3.59), and stroke (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 2.41-2.94)(P < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSION: There is an increasing age-adjusted trend in overall CVD and its subtypes among pregnant patients in the USA from 2010 to 2019. Pregnant patients with CVD had higher odds of in-hospital mortality than those without CVD. However, in-hospital all-cause mortality among patients with and without CVD has decreased over the past 10 years. CVD was associated with higher 6-week postpartum all-cause readmission, myocardial infarction, and stroke rates.

Incidence, Current Guidelines and Management of Gastrointestinal Bleeding after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: There is a significant increase in morbidity and mortality in patients complicated by major bleeding following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). It has become more challenging to manage such complications when the patient needs to be on anticoagulation or antiplatelet agent post-procedure to prevent thrombotic/embolic complications. METHODS: We systematically reviewed all available randomized controlled trials and observational studies to identify incidence rates of gastrointestinal bleeding post-procedure. After performing a systematic search, a total of 8731 patients from 15 studies (5 RCTs and 10 non-RCTs) were included in this review. RESULTS: The average rate of gastrointestinal bleeding during follow-up was 3.0% in randomized controlled trials and 1.9% among observational studies. CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal bleeding has been noted to be higher in the RCTs as compared to observational studies. This review expands knowledge of current guidelines and possible management of patients undergoing TAVR.

Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease on In-Hospital Outcomes of Hospitalizations With Acute Limb Ischemia Undergoing Endovascular Therapy.

PURPOSE: Studies on outcomes related to endovascular treatment (EVT) in advanced stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) among hospitalizations with acute limb ischemia (ALI) are limited. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was quarried from October 2015 to December 2017 to identify the hospitalizations with ALI and undergoing EVT. The study population was subdivided into 3 groups based on their CKD stages: group 1 (No CKD, stage I, stage II), group 2 (CKD stage III, stage IV), and group 3 (CKD stage V and ESRD). The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 51 995 hospitalizations with ALI undergoing EVT were identified. The in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in group 2 (OR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.04 - 1.32, p=0.009) and group 3 (OR = 3.18; 95% CI 2.74-3.69, p<0.0001) compared with group 1. Odds of minor amputation, vascular complication, atherectomy, and blood transfusion were higher among groups 2 and 3 compared with group 1. Group 2 had higher odds of access site hemorrhage compared with groups 1 and 3, whereas group 3 had higher odds of major amputation, postprocedural infection, and postoperative hemorrhage compared with groups 1 and 2. Besides, groups 2 and 3 had lower odds of discharge to home compared with group 1. Finally, the length of hospital stay and cost of care was significantly higher with the advancing CKD stages. CONCLUSION: Advanced CKD stages and ESRD are associated with higher mortality, worse in-hospital outcomes and higher resource utilization among ALI hospitalizations undergoing EVT. CLINICAL IMPACT: Current guidelines are not clear for the optimum first line treatment of acute limb ischemia, especially in patients with advanced kidney disease as compared to normal/mild kidney disease patients. We found that advanced kidney disease is a significant risk factor for worse in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Furthermore, patients with acute limb ischemia and advanced kidney disease is associated with significantly higher resource utilization as compared to patients with normal/mild kidney disease. This study suggests shared decision making between treating physician and patients when considering endovascular therapy for the treatment of acute limb ischemia in patients with advanced kidney disease.

Impact of Active and Historical Cancers on the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicating Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in patients with concomitant cancer. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of adult AMI-CS admissions was identified from the National Inpatient Sample (2000-2017) and stratified by active cancer, historical cancer, and no cancer. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, use of coronary angiography, use of percutaneous coronary intervention, do-not-resuscitate status, palliative care use, hospitalization costs, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Of the 557,974 AMI-CS admissions during this 18-year period, active and historical cancers were noted in 14,826 (2.6%) and 27,073 (4.8%), respectively. From 2000 to 2017, there was a decline in active cancers (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.63-0.79]; P < .001) and an increase in historical cancer (adjusted odds ratio, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.89-2.25]; P < .001). Compared with patients with no cancer, patients with active and historical cancer received less-frequent coronary angiography (57%, 67%, and 70%, respectively) and percutaneous coronary intervention (40%, 47%, and 49%%, respectively) and had higher do-not-resuscitate status (13%, 15%, 7%%, respectively) and palliative care use (12%, 10%, 6%%, respectively) (P < .001). Compared with those without cancer, higher in-hospital mortality was found in admissions with active cancer (45.9% vs 37.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.24-1.34]; P < .001) but not historical cancer (40.1% vs 37.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.98-1.04]; P = .39). AMI-CS admissions with cancer had a shorter hospitalization duration and lower costs (all P < .001). CONCLUSION: Concomitant cancer was associated with less use of guideline-directed procedures. Active, but not historical, cancer was associated with higher mortality in patients with AMI-CS.

Comparison of 6-Month Outcomes of Endovascular vs Surgical Revascularization for Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia.

Importance: The Bypass Versus Angioplasty for Severe Ischemia of the Leg randomized controlled trial showed comparable outcomes between endovascular revascularization (ER) and surgical revascularization (SR) for patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). However, several observational studies showed mixed results. Most of these studies were conducted before advanced endovascular technologies were available. Objective: To compare ER and SR treatment strategies for 6-month outcomes among patients with CLI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used the Nationwide Readmissions Database to identify 66 277 patients with CLI who underwent ER or SR from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Data analyses were conducted from January 1, 2022, to February 8, 2022. A propensity score with 1:1 matching was applied. Patients with CLI who underwent ER or SR were identified, and those with missing information on the length of stay and/or younger than 18 years were excluded. Exposures: Endovascular or surgical revascularization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a major amputation at 6 months. Significant secondary outcomes were in-hospital and 6-month mortality and an in-hospital safety composite of acute kidney injury, major bleeding, and vascular complication. Subgroup analysis was conducted for major amputation in high-volume centers. Results: A total of 66 277 patients were identified between 2016 and 2018 who underwent ER or SR for CLI. The Nationwide Readmissions Database does not provide racial and ethnic categories. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 69.3 (12) years, and 62.5% of patients were male. A total of 54 546 patients (82.3%) underwent ER and 11 731 (17.7%) underwent SR. After propensity score matching, 11 106 matched pairs were found. Endovascular revascularization was associated with an 18% higher risk of major amputation compared with SR (997 of 10 090 [9.9%] vs 869 of 10 318 [8.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.29; P = .001). However, no difference was observed in major amputation risk when both procedures were performed in high-volume centers. Endovascular revascularization and SR had similar mortality rates (517 of 11 106 [4.7%] vs 490 of 11 106 [4.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20; P = .39). However, the ER group had a 17% lower risk of in-hospital safety outcomes compared with the SR group (2584 of 11 106 [23.3%] vs 2979 of 11 106 [26.8%]; odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.88; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that ER was safer, without any difference in mortality, but ER was associated with an increased risk of major amputation compared with SR. However, the risk of major amputation was similar when both procedures were performed at high-volume centers.

COVID-19 and liver diseases, what we know so far.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia outbreak started in December 2019. On March 12, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) constitutes a pandemic, and as of May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 has infected over 167.3 million patients, including 3.4 million deaths, reported to WHO. In this review, we will focus on the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the liver. We will discuss how chronic liver diseases affect the COVID-19 disease course and outcomes. We will also discuss the SARS-CoV-2 effects on the liver, mechanisms of acute liver injury, and potential management plans.

Invasive Versus Medical Management in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Background The role of invasive management compared with medical management in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is uncertain, given the increased risk of procedural complications in patients with CKD. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of invasive management with medical management in patients with NSTEMI-CKD. Methods and Results We identified NSTEMI and CKD stages 3, 4, 5, and end-stage renal disease admissions using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes from the Nationwide Readmission Database 2016 to 2018. Patients were stratified into invasive and medical management. Primary outcome was mortality (in-hospital and 6 months after discharge). Secondary outcomes were in-hospital postprocedural complications (acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, major bleeding) and postdischarge 6-month safety and major adverse cardiovascular events. Out of 141 052 patients with NSTEMI-CKD, 85 875 (60.9%) were treated with invasive management, whereas 55 177 (39.1%) patients were managed medically. In propensity-score matched cohorts, invasive strategy was associated with lower in-hospital (CKD 3: odds ratio [OR], 0.47 [95% CI, 0.43-0.51]; P<0.001; CKD 4: OR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.89]; P<0.001; CKD 5: OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.49-1.06]; P=0.096; end-stage renal disease: OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.46-0.56]; P<0.001) and 6-month mortality. Invasive management was associated with higher in-hospital postprocedural complications but no difference in postdischarge safety outcomes. Invasive management was associated with a lower hazard of major adverse cardiovascular events at 6 months in all CKD groups compared with medical management. Conclusions Invasive management was associated with lower mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events but minimal increased in-hospital complications in patients with NSTEMI-CKD compared with medical management, suggesting patients with NSTEMI-CKD should be offered invasive management.

Right ventricular systolic pressure - Non-invasive bedside predictor of mortality and readmission in heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction hospitalization.

OBJECTIVE: To study the prognostic role of right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) in patients with heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND: Although RVSP is a readily available echocardiographic parameter, it is often underused. Its prognostic role in patients with heart failure is not well established compared with pulmonary artery pressure measured by right heart catheterization. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with acute heart failure hospitalization admitted to the hospital from January 2005 to December 2018. The primary predictor was right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) obtained from bedside transthoracic echocardiography at admission. We divided RVSP into two groups, RVSP <40 mm Hg (reference group) and RVSP ≥40 mm Hg. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were all-cause readmission and cardiac readmission. We conducted propensity-score matching and applied cox-proportional hazard model to compute hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Out of 972 HF patients, 534 patients had RVSP <40 mm Hg and 438 patients had RVSP ≥40 mm Hg. Patients with RVSP ≥40 mm Hg compared with RVSP <40 mm Hg were associated with higher rates of death [HR: 1.60, 95% CI: 1.22-2.09, P-value = 0.001], all-cause readmissions [HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.09-1.73, P-value = 0.008] and cardiac readmissions [HR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.07-1.85, P-value = 0.014]. CONCLUSION: Higher RVSP (≥40 mm Hg) in HF patients was associated with higher rates of death, all-cause readmissions, and cardiac readmissions. RVSP can be considered as a prognostic marker for mortality and readmission.

Absolute lymphocyte count as a predictor of mortality and readmission in heart failure hospitalization.

Background: There is renewed interest in pursuing frugal and readily available laboratory markers to predict mortality and readmission in heart failure. We aim to determine the relationship between absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure hospitalization. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with heart failure. Patients were divided into two groups based on ALC, less than or equal to 1500 cells/mm3 and > 1500 cells/ mm3. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We did subgroup analysis based on ejection fraction and studied the association between ALC categories and clinical outcomes. Both ALC groups are matched by propensity score, outcomes were analyzed by Cox regression, and estimates are presented in hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: We included 1029 patients in the pre-matched cohort and 766 patients in the propensity-score matched cohort. The median age was 64 years (IQR, 54-75), and 60.78% were male. In the matched cohort, ALC less than or equal to 1500 cells/mm3 had a higher risk of mortality compared with ALC > 1500 cells/mm3 (HR 1.51, 95% CI: 1.17-1.95; P = 0.002). These results were reproducible in subgroups of heart failure. When ALC was divided into four groups based on their levels, the lowest group of ALC had the highest risk of mortality. Conclusions: In patients with heart failure and both subgroups, ALC less than or equal to 1500 cells/mm3 had a higher risk of mortality. Patients in lower groups of the ALC categories had a higher risk of mortality.