Cardiology referral during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES: This study presents the cardiology referral model adopted at the University of Sa˜o Paulo-Hospital das Clı´nicas complex during the initial period of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, main reasons for requesting a cardiologic evaluation, and clinical profile of and prognostic predictors in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this observational study, data of all cardiology referral requests between March 30, 2020 and July 6, 2020 were collected prospectively. A descriptive analysis of the reasons for cardiologic evaluation requests and the most common cardiologic diagnoses was performed. A multivariable model was used to identify independent predictors of in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Cardiologic evaluation was requested for 206 patients admitted to the ICHC-COVID. A diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed for 180 patients. Cardiologic complications occurred in 77.7% of the patients. Among these, decompensated heart failure was the most common complication (38.8%), followed by myocardial injury (35%), and arrhythmias, especially high ventricular response atrial fibrillation (17.7%). Advanced age, greater need of ventilatory support on admission, and pre-existing heart failure were independently associated with inhospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A hybrid model combining in-person referral with remote discussion and teaching is a viable alternative to overcome COVID-19 limitations. Cardiologic evaluation remains important during the pandemic, as patients with COVID-19 frequently develop cardiovascular complications or decompensation of the underlying heart disease

Sternoclavicular joint septic arthritis in a previously healthy adult

Sternoclavicular joint infection is a rare condition that usuallyoccurs in patients with predisposing factors. There are few casesof spontaneous septic arthritis of the sternoclavicular joint in healthyadults reported in the medical literature. Diagnosis may be difficultsince sternoclavicular pain may be referred to distant sites anddepends on specialized radiological studies. It is presented the caseof a 45-year old, previously healthy male, with sternoclavicular septicarthritis due to Staphylococcus aureus diagnosed by computedtomography of the sternoclavicular joint region and blood cultures

Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in postoperative atrial fibrillation: Cost-effectiveness analysis in a single-center, randomized, and prospective trialCentral MessagePerspective

Objectives: Postoperative atrial fibrillation is the most common clinical complication after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. It is associated with a high risk of both stroke and death and increases the length of hospital stay and costs. This study aimed to evaluate anticoagulants in postoperative atrial fibrillation. Methods: A single-center, randomized, prospective, and open-label study. The trial was conducted in Heart Institute at University of São Paulo, Brazil. Patients who developed postoperative atrial fibrillation were randomized to anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or warfarin plus enoxaparin bridging. The primary objective was the cost-effectiveness evaluated by quality-adjusted life years, using the SF-6D questionnaire. The secondary end point was the combination of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, thromboembolic events, infections, bleeding, readmissions, and surgical reinterventions. The safety end point was any bleeding using the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis score. Follow-up period was 30 days after hospital discharge. Results: We analyzed 324 patients and 53 patients were randomized. The median cost-effectiveness was $1423.20 in the warfarin group versus$586.80 in the rivaroxaban group (P = .002). The median cost was lower in the rivaroxaban group, $450.20 versus$947.30 (P < .001). The secondary outcome was similar in both groups, 44.4% in warfarin group versus 38.5% in the rivaroxaban group (P = .65). Bleeding occured in 25.9% in the warfarin group versus 11.5% in the rivaroxaban group (P = .18). Conclusions: Rivaroxaban was more cost-effective when compared with warfarin associated with enoxaparin bridging in postoperative atrial fibrillation after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting