Síndrome cardiorrenal en pacientes con falla cardiaca en un hospital universitario

Background: Cardiorenal syndrome is defined as the coexistence of disorders between the heart and kidney in which alteration of one cause dysfunction of the other acutely or chronically. Purpose: To determine the frequency of cardiorenal syndrome and the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics in hospitalized patients with heart failure. Methodology: An observational, descriptive study was conducted that included patients with heart failure who were hospitalized between 2018 and 2021 from a hospital in Boyacá. Demographic, background, clinical and diagnostic variables were included for the evaluation and analysis of the information. Results: A total of 347 patients were included. The frequency of cardiorenal syndrome was 10%, 20.17% were urban, 16.13% were male, 21.61% had arterial hypertension, 9.79% had diabetes mellitus and 8.64% had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Clinical characteristics: 12.10% had preserved heart failure, 10.08% had reduced heart failure, and 12.68% were Stevenson stage C, all with cardiorenal syndrome. Conclusions: Cardiorenal syndrome is an affectation of multicausal origin, the clinical presentation depends on the organ causing the dysfunction, typically, patients with this clinical entity have had some decompensation that generates hospitalization admissions, changes in quality of life, worse prognosis, and mortality.Introducción: el síndrome cardiorrenal se define como la coexistencia de desórdenes entre el corazón y el riñón en la que la alteración de uno causa la disfunción del otro, de forma aguda o crónica. Objetivo: determinar la frecuencia de síndrome cardiorrenal y las características sociodemográficas y clínicas en pacientes hospitalizados con falla cardiaca. Metodología: se realizó un estudio observacional y descriptivo que incluyó pacientes con falla cardiaca que fueron hospitalizados entre el 2018 y el 2021 en un hospital en Boyacá, Colombia. Se incluyeron las variables demográficas, clínicas, diagnósticas y los antecedentes, para la evaluación y el análisis de la información. Resultados: se incluyó a 347 pacientes, donde la frecuencia del síndrome cardiorrenal fue del 10?%, 20,17?% de zona urbana, 16,13?% de sexo masculino, 21,61?% con hipertensión arterial, 9,79?% con diabetes mellitus y 8,64?% con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica. Las características clínicas fueron: 12,10?% cursaron con insuficiencia cardiaca preservada, 10,08?% con insuficiencia cardiaca reducida y 12,68?% eran del cuadrante de Stevenson estadio C, todos con síndrome cardiorrenal. Conclusiones: el síndrome cardiorrenal es una afectación de origen multicausal, la presentación clínica depende del órgano causante de la disfunción y, típicamente, los pacientes con esta entidad clínica han cursado con alguna descompensación que genera ingresos a hospitalización, cambios en la calidad de vida, peor pronóstico y mortalidad

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health