Post-COVID-19 Symptoms and Heart Disease: Incidence, Prognostic Factors, Outcomes and Vaccination: Results from a Multi-Center International Prospective Registry (HOPE 2)

COVID-19; Heart disease; PersistentCOVID 19; Malaltia cardíaca; PersistentCOVID-19; Enfermedad cardíaca; PersistenteBackground: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. Results: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81–3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04–0.19). Conclusions: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up.Non-conditioned grant (Fundación Interhospitalaria para la Investigación cardiovascular, FIC. Madrid, Spain). This nonprofit institution had no role in the study design; collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; nor in the decision to submit the paper for publication

Meta-Analysis Design and Results in Real Life: Problem Solvers or Detour to Maze. A Critical Review of Meta-Analysis of DAPT Randomized Controlled Trials.

Therapeutic strategies - such as duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary artery stenting - usually generate a large quantity of meta-analyses. The meta-analyses that include the same randomized clinical trials should produce similar results. Our aim in the study is to analyze the quality and to compare the results of meta-analyses focused on a controversial topic such as dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. We searched all published meta-analyses published up to November 2015 (near DAPT trial publication) selecting those that included the same randomized clinical trials comparing patterns of briefer versus longer-term double antiplatelet therapy. Seventeen meta-analyses achieved our selection criteria. Of the seventeen analyzed, we identified seven (41.1%) based on the same ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs), yet their results varied widely. Many of the meta-analyses differed in only some minor aspect of the design (i.e. eligible studies, length of comparators and statistical methods used). Some authors differed in the number of patients participating in RCTs and even, despite reviewing the same underlying trials, only 2 of the 7 meta-analyses included the same number of patients. Meta-analyses around cardiovascular, all-cause or non-cardiovascular death differ frequently. In the DAPT duration setting, several meta-analyses have been recently published based on the same data, presenting several issues making it difficult to determine clear recommendations on certain points.IN receives research funding from Astrazeneca; has received minor consulting fees from Boston, Medtronic, Astrazeneca; and speaking fees or support for attending scientificmeetings fromBoehringer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Lilly, AstraZeneca and Pfizer. AE is Astrazeneca employee. HB receives research funding from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (PIE16/00021), AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen and Novartis; has received consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Novartis; and speaking fees or support for attending scientificmeetings from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Ferrer, Novartis, Servier and MEDSCAPE-the heart.og. The other authors pose no relevant disclosures regarding this manuscript.S

Risk prediction of major cardiac adverse events and all-cause death following covid-19 hospitalization at one year follow-up: The HOPE-2 score

Background: Long -term consequences of COVID-19 are still partly known. Aim of the study: To derive a clinical score for risk prediction of long-term major cardiac adverse events (MACE) and all cause death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Methods: 2573 consecutive patients were enrolled in a multicenter, international registry (HOPE-2) from January 2020 to April 2021 and identified as the derivation cohort. Five hundred and twenty-six patients from the CardioCovid-Italy registry were considered as external validation cohort. A long-term prognostic risk score for MACE and all cause death was derived from a multivariable regression model. Results: Out of 2573 patients enrolled in the HOPE-2 registry, 1481 (58 %) were male, with mean age of 60 +/- 16 years. At long-term follow-up, the overall rate of patients affected by MACE and/or all cause death was 7.8 %. After multivariable regression analysis, independent predictors of MACE and all cause death were identified. The HOPE-2 prognostic score was therefore calculated by giving: 1 -4 points for age class ( = 85), 3 points for history of cardiovascular disease, 1 point for hypertension, 3 points for increased troponin serum levels at admission and 2 points for acute renal failure during hospitalization. Score accuracy at ROC curve analysis was 0.79 (0.74 at external validation). Stratification into 3 risk groups ( 6 points) classified patients into low, intermediate and high risk. The observed MACE and all-cause death rates were 1.9 %, 9.4 % and 26.3 % for low- intermediate and high-risk patients, respectively (Log-rank test p < 0.01). Conclusions: The HOPE-2 prognostic score may be useful for long-term risk stratification in patients with previous COVID-19 hospitalization. High-risk patients may require a strict follow-up

Clinical Profile and Determinants of Mortality in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease Admitted for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND Concern has risen about the effects of COVID-19 in interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients. The aim of our study was to determine clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of ILD patients admitted for COVID-19. METHODS Ancillary analysis of an international, multicenter COVID-19 registry (HOPE: Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation) was performed. The subgroup of ILD patients was selected and compared with the rest of the cohort. RESULTS A total of 114 patients with ILDs were evaluated. Mean ± SD age was 72.4 ± 13.6 years, and 65.8% were men. ILD patients were older, had more comorbidities, received more home oxygen therapy and more frequently had respiratory failure upon admission than non-ILD patients (all p < 0.05). In laboratory findings, ILD patients more frequently had elevated LDH, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer levels (all p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed that chronic kidney disease and respiratory insufficiency on admission were predictors of ventilatory support, and that older age, kidney disease and elevated LDH were predictors of death. CONCLUSIONS Our data show that ILD patients admitted for COVID-19 are older, have more comorbidities, more frequently require ventilatory support and have higher mortality than those without ILDs. Older age, kidney disease and LDH were independent predictors of mortality in this population.S

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry

Background. Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods. Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results. 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399

Underlying heart diseases and acute COVID-19 outcomes

Background: The presence of any underlying heart condition could influence outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: The registry HOPE-COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19, NCT04334291) is an international ambispective study, enrolling COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital, dead or alive. Results: HOPE enrolled 2798 patients from 35 centers in 7 countries. Median age was 67 years (IQR: 53.0–78.0), and most were male (59.5%). A relevant heart disease was present in 682 (24%) cases. These were older, more frequently male, with higher overall burden of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity) and other comorbidities such renal failure, lung, cerebrovascular disease and oncologic antecedents (p &lt; 0.01, for all). The heart cohort received more corticoids (28.9% vs. 20.4%, p &lt; 0.001), antibiotics, but less hydroxychloroquine, antivirals or tocilizumab. Considering the epidemiologic profile, a previous heart condition was independently related with shortterm mortality in the Cox multivariate analysis (1.62; 95% CI 1.29–2.03; p &lt; 0.001). Moreover, heart patients needed more respiratory, circulatory support, and presented more in-hospital events, such heart failure, renal failure, respiratory insufficiency, sepsis, systemic infammatory response syndrome and clinically relevant bleedings (all, p &lt; 0.001), and mortality (39.7% vs. 15.5%; p &lt; 0.001).Conclusions: An underlying heart disease is an adverse prognostic factor for patients suffering COVID-19. Its presence could be related with different clinical drug management and would benefit from maintaining treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers during in-hospital stay

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry

BackgroundMost evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19.MethodsAnalysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses.Results7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM.ConclusionHospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399

Agrupación familiar de anomalías coronarias mediante signo de RAC

Sin financiaciónNo data JCR 20220.593 Q2 SJR 20230,03 C4 IDR 2022UE

Familial clustering of coronary anomalies identified through the RAC sign

Se presenta el caso de agrupamiento familiar de anomalı´as coronarias entre madre e hija que consultaron por dolor tora´ cico y palpitaciones. Se sometieron a una evaluacio´n cardiolo´ gica que incluyo´ un ecocardiograma transtora´ cico (ETT) que revelo´ un signo distintivo de arteria circunfleja retroao´ rtica, o signo de RAC, en ambas pacientes (figura 1A y D, flechas, madre e hija respectivamente). El signo de RAC es una estructura tubular ecoge´nica ubicada en el lado auricular del surco auriculoventricular, visible en la vista apical de 4 ca´maras del ETT, y es altamente indicativo de la presencia de una arteria coronaria ano´mala con trayecto retroao´ rtico. Como parte del estudio de dolor tora´ cico, ambas se sometieron a una angiotomografı´a de arterias coronarias que confirmo´ la existencia de la misma anomalı´a coronaria: origen de la arteria circunfleja en el segmento proximal/ostial de la coronaria derecha, con trayecto retroao´ rtico; en ambas habı´a una arteria de moderado calibre y desarrollo (flechas en las figura 1B y C, de la madre, y figura 1E y F, de la hija; CD: coronaria derecha y seno derecho; CI: seno coronariano izquierdo; Cx: arteria circunfleja; DA: descendente anterior; NC: seno no coronariano). Este caso subraya la importancia de considerar factores gene´ticos en las anomalı´as coronarias, ya que investigaciones recientes han documentado una incidencia significativa de agrupamiento familiar en la deteccio´n de estas anomalı´as. Se ha observado que en varios casos de agrupamiento familiar la anatomı´a de la anomalı´a coronaria se repetı´a, lo que respalda la hipo´tesis de un componente hereditario. Dada esta conexio´n, se propone considerar un cribado de los familiares de primer grado cuando se identifiquen anomalı´as coronarias de alto riesgo o antecedentes de muerte su´ bita y deteccio´n de anomalı´a coronaria, para identificar posibles patrones gene´ticos y aplicar medidas preventivas a poblaciones de riesgo.Sin financiaciónNo data JCR 20220.463 Q3 SJR 20220,03 C4 IDR 2022UE