Diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 Cycle Threshold Value Predicts Disease Severity, Survival, and Six-Month Sequelae in COVID-19 Symptomatic Patients

To date, there is no severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-(SARS-CoV-2)-specific prognostic biomarker available. We assessed whether SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) value at diagnosis could predict novel CoronaVirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity, clinical manifestations, and six-month sequelae. Hospitalized and outpatient cases were randomly sampled from the diagnoses of March 2020 and data collected at 6 months by interview and from the regional database for COVID-19 emergency. Patients were stratified according to their RNA-dependent-RNA-polymerase Ct in the nasopharyngeal swab at diagnosis as follows: Group A ≤ 20.0, 20.0 < group B ≤ 28.0, and Group C > 28.0. Disease severity was classified according to a composite scale evaluating hospital admission, worst oxygen support required, and survival. Two hundred patients were included, 27.5% in Groups A and B both, 45.0% in Group C; 90% of patients were symptomatic and 63.7% were hospitalized. The median time from COVID-19 onset to swab collection was five days. Lethality, disease severity, type, and number of signs and symptoms, as well as six-month sequelae distributed inversely among the groups with respect to SARS-CoV-2 Ct. After controlling for confounding, SARS-CoV-2 Ct at diagnosis was still associated with COVID-19-related death (p = 0.023), disease severity (p = 0.023), number of signs and symptoms (p < 0.01), and presence of six-month sequelae (p < 0.01). Early quantification of SARS-CoV-2 may be a useful predictive marker to inform differential strategies of clinical management and resource allocation

Antiplatelet versus oral anticoagulant therapy as antithrombotic prophylaxis after mitral valve repair

Objective To verify the rate of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications during the first 6 months after mitral valve repair and to assess whether the type of antithrombotic therapy influenced clinical outcome. Methods Retrospective data were retrieved from 19 centers. Inclusion criteria were isolated mitral valve repair with ring implantation. Exclusion criteria were ongoing or past atrial fibrillation and any combined intraoperative surgical procedures. The study cohort consisted of 1882 patients (aged 58 ± 15 years; 36% women), and included 1517 treated with an oral anticoagulant (VKA group) and 365 with antiplatelet drugs (APLT group). Primary efficacy outcome was the incidence of arterial thromboembolic events within 6 months and primary safety outcome was the incidence of major bleeding within 6 months. Propensity matching was performed to obtain 2 comparable cohorts (858 vs 286). Results No differences were detected for arterial embolic complications in matched cohort (1.6% VKA vs 2.1% APLT; P =.50). Conversely, patients in the APLT group showed lower incidence of major bleeding complications (3.9% vs 0.7%; P =.01). Six-month mortality rate was significantly higher in the VKA group (2.7% vs 0.3%; P =.02). Multivariable analysis in the matched cohort found VKA as independent predictor of major bleeding complications and mortality at 6 months. Conclusions Vitamin K antagonist therapy was not superior to antiplatelet therapy to prevent thromboembolic complications after mitral valve repair. Our data suggest that oral anticoagulation may carry a higher bleeding risk compared with antiplatelet therapy, although these results should be confirmed in an adequately powered randomized controlled trial