Predicting critical illness on initial diagnosis of COVID-19 based on easily obtained clinical variables: development and validation of the PRIORITY model

Objectives: We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model, based on clinical history and examination findings on initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), to identify patients at risk of critical outcomes. Methods: We used data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 132 centres in Spain (23rd March to 21st May 2020). For the development cohort, tertiary referral hospitals were selected, while the validation cohort included smaller hospitals. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or admission to intensive care unit. Clinical signs and symptoms, demographics, and medical history ascertained at presentation were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and logistic regression was used to construct the predictive model. Results: There were 10 433 patients, 7850 in the development cohort (primary outcome 25.1%, 1967/7850) and 2583 in the validation cohort (outcome 27.0%, 698/2583). The PRIORITY model included: age, dependency, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, dyspnoea, tachypnoea, confusion, systolic blood pressure, and SpO2 ≤93% or oxygen requirement. The model showed high discrimination for critical illness in both the development (C-statistic 0.823; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.813, 0.834) and validation (C-statistic 0.794; 95%CI 0.775, 0.813) cohorts. A freely available web-based calculator was developed based on this model (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/2344). Conclusions: The PRIORITY model, based on easily obtained clinical information, had good discrimination and generalizability for identifying COVID-19 patients at risk of critical outcomes.No funding was received for this work

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. Methods: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015. Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years, 65 to 80 years, and = 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. Results: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 = 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients =80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%, 65 years; 20.5%, 65-79 years; 31.3%, =80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%, <65 years;30.1%, 65-79 years;34.7%, =80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%, =80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age = 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI = 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88), and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared, the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. Conclusion: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age = 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI), and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

[Purpose]: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. [Methods]: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years,65 to 80 years,and ≥ 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. [Results]: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 ≥ 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients ≥80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%,65 years; 20.5%,65-79 years; 31.3%,≥80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%,<65 years;30.1%,65-79 years;34.7%,≥80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%,≥80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age ≥ 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI ≥ 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88),and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared,the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. [Conclusion]: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

Rationale and design of the rigorous atrial analysis in advanced interatrial block (ARABIA) prospective study

Advanced interatrial block (IAB) is present in 10% of subjects ≥75 years and is associated with the risk of clinical events. Methods and results: Prospective multicenter study that will include subjects ≥75 years without exclusion criteria (indication for anticoagulation, cardiac devices, severe valve disease, systolic dysfunction, moderate or severe cognitive impairment, poor echocardiographic window, non-sinus rhythm or partial IAB, stroke, and life expectancy <2 years). A total of 356 subjects, 178 patients with advanced IAB (exposed) and 178 matched individuals with normal P-wave (non-exposed) will be included. Electrocardiogram and advanced transthoracic echocardiography will be performed. Two substudies will include magnetic resonance imaging: cardiac (86 subjects, 43 exposed, and 43 non-exposed) and brain (86 subjects, 43 exposed, and 43 non-exposed). The follow-up will be 2 years. Our main objective is to determine the association of advanced IAB, P-wave duration, and atrial imaging parameters (I] atrial global longitudinal strain, II] maximal left atrial volume index, III] left atrial ejection fraction, IV] left atrial fibrosis - % total left atrial area V] inter- and intra-atrial asynchrony/dyssynchrony) with clinical events (atrial fibrillation, stroke, cognitive impairment, and mortality). The secondary objective is to assess the association of the P-wave duration with atrial imaging parameters and of both with cerebral microemboli in magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusion: Our study will provide data regarding the association of advanced IAB, P-wave duration, and atrial imaging parameters with clinical events. We will also assess the association P-wave duration-atrial imaging parameters-cerebral microemboli.Sin financiación1.380 JCR (2021) Q4, 135/143 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems0.419 SJR (2021) Q3, 203/356 Cardiology and Cardiovascular MedicineNo data IDR 2020UE

Predicting critical illness on initial diagnosis of COVID-19 based on easily obtained clinical variables: development and validation of the PRIORITY model

Objectives: We aimed to develop and validate a prediction model, based on clinical history and examination findings on initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), to identify patients at risk of critical outcomes. Methods: We used data from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a cohort of consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 132 centres in Spain (23rd March to 21st May 2020). For the development cohort, tertiary referral hospitals were selected, while the validation cohort included smaller hospitals. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or admission to intensive care unit. Clinical signs and symptoms, demographics, and medical history ascertained at presentation were screened using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator, and logistic regression was used to construct the predictive model. Results: There were 10 433 patients, 7850 in the development cohort (primary outcome 25.1%, 1967/7850) and 2583 in the validation cohort (outcome 27.0%, 698/2583). The PRIORITY model included: age, dependency, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, dyspnoea, tachypnoea, confusion, systolic blood pressure, and SpO2 ≤93% or oxygen requirement. The model showed high discrimination for critical illness in both the development (C-statistic 0.823; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.813, 0.834) and validation (C-statistic 0.794; 95%CI 0.775, 0.813) cohorts. A freely available web-based calculator was developed based on this model (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/2344). Conclusions: The PRIORITY model, based on easily obtained clinical information, had good discrimination and generalizability for identifying COVID-19 patients at risk of critical outcomes

Contemporary use of cefazolin for MSSA infective endocarditis: analysis of a national prospective cohort

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real use of cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infective endocarditis (IE) in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) and to compare it with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP). Methods: Prospective cohort study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA IE treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Outcomes assessed were relapse; intra-hospital, overall, and endocarditis-related mortality; and adverse events. Risk of renal toxicity with each treatment was evaluated separately. Results: We included 631 IE episodes caused by MSSA treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Antibiotic treatment was cloxacillin, cefazolin, or both in 537 (85%), 57 (9%), and 37 (6%) episodes, respectively. Patients treated with cefazolin had significantly higher rates of comorbidities (median Charlson Index 7, P <0.01) and previous renal failure (57.9%, P <0.01). Patients treated with cloxacillin presented higher rates of septic shock (25%, P = 0.033) and new-onset or worsening renal failure (47.3%, P = 0.024) with significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality (38.5%, P = 0.017). One-year IE-related mortality and rate of relapses were similar between treatment groups. None of the treatments were identified as risk or protective factors. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefazolin is a valuable option for the treatment of MSSA IE, without differences in 1-year mortality or relapses compared with cloxacillin, and might be considered equally effective

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis.

The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327  There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in th