Search

Background: Few data are available on long-term drug therapy and its potential prognostic impact after Takotsubo syndrome (TTS). Aim of the study is to evaluate clinical characteristics and long-term outcome of TTS patients on Renin Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi)., Methods: TTS patients were enrolled in the international multicenter GEIST (GErman Italian Spanish Takotsubo) registry. Median follow-up was 31 (Interquartile range 12-56) months. Comparison of RASi treated vs. untreated patients was performed within the overall population and after 1:1 propensity score matching for age, sex, comorbidities, type of trigger and in-hospital complications., Registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04361994, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04361994 RESULTS: Of the 2453 TTS patients discharged alive, 1683 (68%) received RASi therapy. Patients with RASi were older (age 71 ± 11 vs 69 ± 13 years, P = .01), with higher prevalence of hypertension (74% vs 53%, P < .01) and diabetes (19% v s15%, P = .01), higher admission left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (41 ± 11% vs 39 ± 12%, P < .01) and lower rates of in-hospital complications (18.9% vs 29.6%, P < .01). At multivariable analysis, RASi therapy at discharge was independently associated with lower mortality (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.87, P < .01). Survival analysis showed that at long term, patients treated with RASi had lower mortality rates in the overall cohort (log-rank P = .001). However, this benefit was not found among patients treated with RASi in the matched cohort (log-rank P = .168). Potential survival benefit of RASi were present, both in the overall and matched cohort, in 2 subgroups: patients with admission LVEF ≤ 40% (HR 0.54 95% CI 0.38-0.78, P = .001; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37-0.95, P = .030) and diabetes (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.73, P = .002; HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.82, P = .011)., Conclusions: Long-term therapy with RASi after a TTS episode was not associated with lower mortality rates at propensity score analysis. However, potential survival benefit can be found among patients with admission LVEF ≤ 40% or diabetes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None reported., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A systematic analysis of concomitant arterial hypertension in COVID-19 patients and the impact of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have not been studied in a large multicentre cohort yet. We conducted a subanalysis from the international HOPE Registry (https://hopeprojectmd.com, NCT04334291) comparing COVID-19 in presence and absence of arterial hypertension., Materials and Methods: Out of 5837 COVID-19 patients, 2850 (48.8%) patients had the diagnosis arterial hypertension. 1978/2813 (70.3%) patients were already treated with ACEI or ARBs. The clinical outcome of the present subanalysis included all-cause mortality over 40 days of follow-up., Results: Patients with arterial hypertension suffered significantly more from different complications including respiratory insufficiency (60.8% vs 39.5%), heart failure (9.9% vs 3.1%), acute kidney injury (25.3% vs 7.3%), pneumonia (90.6% vs 86%), sepsis (14.7% vs 7.5%), and bleeding events (3.6% vs 1.6%). The mortality rate was 29.6% in patients with concomitant arterial hypertension and 11.3% without arterial hypertension (P < .001). Invasive and non-invasive respiratory supports were significantly more required in presence of arterial hypertension as compared without it. In the multivariate cox regression analysis, while age≥65, benzodiazepine, antidepressant at admission, elevated LDH or creatinine, respiratory insufficiency and sepsis might be a positive independent predictors of mortality, antiviral drugs, interferon treatment, ACEI or ARBs at discharge or oral anticoagulation at discharge might be an independent negative predictor of the mortality., Conclusions: The mortality rate and in-hospital complications might be increased in COVID-19 patients with a concomitant history of arterial hypertension. The history of ACEI or ARBs treatments does not seem to impact the outcome of these patients., (© 2021 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest public health crisis of the last 100 years. Countries have responded with various levels of lockdown to save lives and stop health systems from being overwhelmed. At the same time, lockdowns entail large socioeconomic costs. One exit strategy under consideration is a mobile phone app that traces the close contacts of those infected with COVID-19. Recent research has demonstrated the theoretical effectiveness of this solution in different disease settings. However, concerns have been raised about such apps because of the potential privacy implications. This could limit the acceptability of app-based contact tracing in the general population. As the effectiveness of this approach increases strongly with app uptake, it is crucial to understand public support for this intervention., Objective: The objective of this study is to investigate the user acceptability of a contact-tracing app in five countries hit by the pandemic., Methods: We conducted a largescale, multicountry study (N=5995) to measure public support for the digital contact tracing of COVID-19 infections. We ran anonymous online surveys in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We measured intentions to use a contact-tracing app across different installation regimes (voluntary installation vs automatic installation by mobile phone providers) and studied how these intentions vary across individuals and countries., Results: We found strong support for the app under both regimes, in all countries, across all subgroups of the population, and irrespective of regional-level COVID-19 mortality rates. We investigated the main factors that may hinder or facilitate uptake and found that concerns about cybersecurity and privacy, together with a lack of trust in the government, are the main barriers to adoption., Conclusions: Epidemiological evidence shows that app-based contact tracing can suppress the spread of COVID-19 if a high enough proportion of the population uses the app and that it can still reduce the number of infections if uptake is moderate. Our findings show that the willingness to install the app is very high. The available evidence suggests that app-based contact tracing may be a viable approach to control the diffusion of COVID-19., (©Samuel Altmann, Luke Milsom, Hannah Zillessen, Raffaele Blasone, Frederic Gerdon, Ruben Bach, Frauke Kreuter, Daniele Nosenzo, Séverine Toussaert, Johannes Abeler. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 28.08.2020.)