Search

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) may be an effective, safe, and affordable treatment for Covid-19 that can be used in selected patients. However, more evidence on its association when it is used in different stages of the disease with clinical outcomes is required. This observational study investigates the association between treatment with HCQ and mortality in patients with Covid-19. Methods: The data from 6217 patients who died or were discharged from 24 Spanish hospitals were analyzed. Propensity matching scores (PMS) were used. Results: 5094 patients received HCQ. Death was recorded for 17.5% of those who had HCQ and 34.1% of those who did not have it. Mortality was lower for those who had HCQ, OR=0.41 (95% CI=0.34-0.48). The PMS analysis also showed that mortality was lower for those receiving HCQ, OR=0.47 (95%CI=0.36-0.62). PMS analysis for categories revealed an association between HCQ and lowered mortality for patients over 65 years of age, with a past medical history of hypertension, for those who were diagnosed during admission with sepsis related organ failure or pneumonia, and for those with lymphocytopenia, raised troponin, LDH, ferritin and D-dimer. No increase in mortality associated with HCQ was observed in any category of any of the variables investigated. Conclusions: HCQ could be associated with lower mortality for older patients, those with more severe disease and raised inflammatory markers. Further RCTs, observational studies, and summaries of both types of evidence on this topic are necessary to select the precise profile of patients that may benefit from HCQ.

Background The use of Renin-Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been questioned because both share a target receptor site. Methods HOPE-COVID-19 (NCT04334291) is an international investigator-initiated registry. Patients are eligible when discharged after an in-hospital stay with COVID-19, dead or alive. Here, we analyze the impact of previous and continued in-hospital treatment with RASi in all-cause mortality and the development of in-stay complications. Results We included 6503 patients, over 18 years, from Spain and Italy with data on their RASi status. Of those, 36.8% were receiving any RASi before admission. RASi patients were older, more frequently male, with more comorbidities and frailer. Their probability of death and ICU admission was higher. However, after adjustment, these differences disappeared. Regarding RASi in-hospital use, those who continued the treatment were younger, with balanced comorbidities but with less severe COVID19. Raw mortality and secondary events were less frequent in RASi. After adjustment, patients receiving RASi still presented significantly better outcomes, with less mortality, ICU admissions, respiratory insufficiency, need for mechanical ventilation or prone, sepsis, SIRS and renal failure (p

BackgroundSmoking has been associated with poorer outcomes in relation to COVID-19. Smokers have higher risk of mortality and have a more severe clinical course. There is paucity of data available on this issue, and a definitive link between smoking and COVID-19 prognosis has yet to be established.MethodsWe included 5224 patients with COVID-19 with an available smoking history in a multicentre international registry Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19 (NCT04334291). Patients were included following an in-hospital admission with a COVID-19 diagnosis. We analysed the outcomes of patients with a current or prior history of smoking compared with the non-smoking group. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital death.ResultsFinally, 5224 patients with COVID-19 with available smoking status were analysed. A total of 3983 (67.9%) patients were non-smokers, 934 (15.9%) were former smokers and 307 (5.2%) were active smokers. The median age was 66 years (IQR 52.0–77.0) and 58.6% were male. The most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (48.5%) and dyslipidaemia (33.0%). A relevant lung disease was present in 19.4%. In-hospital complications such sepsis (23.6%) and embolic events (4.3%) occurred more frequently in the smoker group (pConclusionSmoking has a negative prognostic impact on patients hospitalised with COVID-19.

Background: The presence of any underlying heart condition could influence outcomes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: The registry HOPE-COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19, NCT04334291) is an international ambispective study, enrolling COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital, dead or alive. Results: HOPE enrolled 2798 patients from 35 centers in 7 countries. Median age was 67 years (IQR: 53.0-78.0), and most were male (59.5%). A relevant heart disease was present in 682 (24%) cases. These were older, more frequently male, with higher overall burden of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking habit, obesity) and other comorbidities such renal failure, lung, cerebrovascular disease and oncologic antecedents (p < 0.01, for all). The heart cohort received more corticoids (28.9% vs. 20.4%, p < 0.001), antibiotics, but less hydroxychloroquine, antivirals or tocilizumab. Considering the epidemiologic profile, a previous heart condition was independently related with shortterm mortality in the Cox multivariate analysis (1.62; 95% CI 1.29-2.03; p < 0.001). Moreover, heart patients needed more respiratory, circulatory support, and presented more in-hospital events, such heart failure, renal failure, respiratory insufficiency, sepsis, systemic infammatory response syndrome and clinically relevant bleedings (all, p < 0.001), and mortality (39.7% vs. 15.5%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: An underlying heart disease is an adverse prognostic factor for patients suffering COVID-19. Its presence could be related with different clinical drug management and would benefit from maintaining treatment with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers during in-hospital stay. Fundacion Interhospitalaria para la Investigacion cardiovascular, FIC. Madrid, Spain 3.487 JCR (2021) Q2, 70/143 Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems 0.52 SJR (2021) Q2, 163/356 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine No data IDR 2021 UEM

Objectives No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Design Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). Setting Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Patients Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Interventions Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. Measurements and main results Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p Conclusions Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.

Background and objectives A relationship between neoplasms and Takotsubo syndrome (TS) has been postulated. Our goal was to determine its prevalence in patients with TS, compare the clinical profile of TS with or without cancer and study its long-term evolution. Materials and methods The oncological situation of patients included in the National Registry on TAKOtsubo syndrome (RETAKO), admitted between 2002 and 2019, provided by 38 hospitals throughout the country is analysed. Any history of malignancy or tumour, even benign, that received chemotherapy, radiotherapy or specific surgery, current or past, was considered. Results Any type of neoplasm was described in 129 (11.8%), within a cohort of 1097 patients with TS. The cohort of patients with neoplasm, with a lower percentage of women (79.1 vs. 88.3%; p = 0.003), showed a non-significant tendency at an older age, hyperuricaemia, sleep apnoea and lower LVEF on admission, with a similar cardiovascular risk factor profile, but more chronic anaemia and immunosuppression. The most common neoplasm was breast cancer. During their hospital stay, the cancer patients suffered more complications, highlighting heart failure/shock, acute renal failure and a trend towards combined infections. On follow-up, they presented higher mortality and more combined MACE events, with a non-significant trend in the occurrence of cardiovascular recurrences or readmissions. Conclusions The prevalence of neoplasms in patients with TS is high. The clinical presentation is different in relation to patients who do not have neoplasms and they probably represent a risk factor for a worse hospital and long term prognosis.

Resumen Antecedentes y objetivo Se ha postulado una relacion entre neoplasias y sindrome de Takotsubo (STB). Nuestro objetivo fue determinar su prevalencia en enfermos con STB, comparar el perfil clinico de STB con cancer o no y estudiar su evolucion a largo plazo. Materiales y metodos Analizamos la situacion oncologica de pacientes incluidos en el REgistro nacional sobre sindrome de TAKOtsubo (RETAKO), ingresados entre 2002 y 2019, aportados por 38 hospitales de todo el pais. Se admitio cualquier antecedente de malignidad/tumor que, aun benigno, recibiera quimioterapia, radioterapia o cirugia especifica, actual o pasado. Resultados Se describio cualquier tipo de neoplasia en 129 (11,8%) casos, dentro de una cohorte de 1.097 pacientes con STB. Los oncologicos, con menor porcentaje de mujeres (79,1 vs. 88,3%; p = 0,003), mostraron una tendencia no significativa a mayor edad, hiperuricemia, apnea del sueno, con un menor FEVI al ingreso, y un perfil de factores de riesgo cardiovascular similar, pero mas anemia cronica e inmunosupresion. La neoplasia mas frecuente fue el cancer de mama. Durante su estancia hospitalaria, los oncologicos mostraron mas complicaciones, destacando insuficiencia cardiaca/shock, insuficiencia renal aguda y una tendencia en el combinado de infecciones. En el seguimiento, presentaron mayor mortalidad y mas sucesos combinados MACE, con una tendencia, no significativa, a la aparicion de recurrencias o reingresos cardiovasculares. Conclusiones La prevalencia de neoplasias en pacientes con STB fue elevada. La presentacion clinica fue diferente en relacion con los pacientes que no las presentan y suponen probablemente un factor de riesgo de peor pronostico, tanto hospitalario como a largo plazo.

Background. Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods. Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results. 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59–2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92–4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01–1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Introduction and objectives Smoking has been related with lower short-term mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction. This may be caused by different baseline characteristics, since smokers are significantly younger at the time of infarction. Our purpose was to study the smoking paradox focusing on age. Methods We retrospectively studied 118 consecutive people aged Results Arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus, were more frequent in the older group (P Conclusions Young smokers maintained the lower short-term events paradox. Our findings can contribute to explain the apparently different course of myocardial infarction in young people and point out a different mechanism of infarction in smokers.

COVID-19; Heart disease; Persistent COVID 19; Malaltia cardíaca; Persistent COVID-19; Enfermedad cardíaca; Persistente Background: Heart disease is linked to worse acute outcomes after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although long-term outcomes and prognostic factor data are lacking. We aim to characterize the outcomes and the impact of underlying heart diseases after surviving COVID-19 hospitalization. Methods: We conducted an analysis of the prospective registry HOPE-2 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID-19-2, NCT04778020). We selected patients discharged alive and considered the primary end-point all-cause mortality during follow-up. As secondary main end-points, we included any readmission or any post-COVID-19 symptom. Clinical features and follow-up events are compared between those with and without cardiovascular disease. Factors with p < 0.05 in the univariate analysis were entered into the multivariate analysis to determine independent prognostic factors. Results: HOPE-2 closed on 31 December 2021, with 9299 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, and 1805 died during this acute phase. Finally, 7014 patients with heart disease data were included in the present analysis, from 56 centers in 8 countries. Heart disease (+) patients were older (73 vs. 58 years old), more frequently male (63 vs. 56%), had more comorbidities than their counterparts, and suffered more frequently from post-COVID-19 complications and higher mortality (OR heart disease: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.81–3.84). Vaccination was found to be an independent protector factor (HR all-cause death: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04–0.19). Conclusions: After surviving the acute phase, patients with underlying heart disease continue to present a more complex clinical profile and worse outcomes including increased mortality. The COVID-19 vaccine could benefit survival in patients with heart disease during follow-up. Non-conditioned grant (Fundación Interhospitalaria para la Investigación cardiovascular, FIC. Madrid, Spain). This nonprofit institution had no role in the study design; collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; nor in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Background: Patients with sepsis with a concomitant coronavirus (COVID-19) infection are related to a high morbidity and mortality rate. We investigated a large cohort of patients with sepsis with a concomitant COVID-19, and we developed a risk score for the estimation of sepsis risk in COVID-19.Methods: We conducted a sub-analysis from the international Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry for COVID-19 (HOPE-COVID-19-Registry, NCT04334291). Out of 5,837 patients with COVID-19, 624 patients were diagnosed with sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 International Consensus.Results: In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were identified as independent predictors for developing sepsis: current smoking, tachypnoea (>22 breath per minute), hemoptysis, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) 1.5 mg/dl. By assigning odds ratio (OR) weighted points to these variables, the following three risk categories were defined to develop sepsis during admission: low-risk group (probability of sepsis 3.1–11.8%); intermediate-risk group (24.8–53.8%); and high-risk-group (58.3–100%). A score of 1 was assigned to current smoking, tachypnoea, decreased SpO2, decreased BP, decreased GCS, elevated PCT, TnI, and creatinine, whereas a score of 2 was assigned to hemoptysis.Conclusions: The HOPE Sepsis Score including nine parameters is useful in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients to develop sepsis. Sepsis in COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality rate.

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

Aortic valve disease is a common condition whose prevalence is increasing, especially in Western countries. Two main families of cardiac prostheses are available: mechanical and biological prostheses. Nevertheless, the use of mechanical surgical valves has declined significantly over time in favor of bioprosthetic surgical valves even among middle-aged patients. The dominance of bioprosthetic valves was enhanced further with the introduction of transcatheter aortic valves. However, some concerns have arisen in recent years about clinical and subclinical leaflet thrombosis of both surgical and transcatheter bioprostheses. This manuscript aims to discuss the current evidence relating to the incidence, pathophysiology, clinical implications, and management strategies of biological valve leaflet thrombosis.

Objective: Data on long-term outcomes after internal mammary artery (IMA) coronary graft failure are scarce. Our objective was to describe the clinical characteristics, management, and prognosis after angiographically confirmed IMA graft failure following coronary revascularization. Methods: A three-hospital retrospective registry, observational and descriptive, with prospective follow-up of all consecutive cases of IMA graft failure between 2004 and 2014 was conducted. After treatment, clinical and procedural features were compared between those with and without cardiovascular events. Results: Fifty-seven patients were included (89% male, mean age: 62 years, at surgery) in the registry. Most patients underwent an IMA angioplasty (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], 74%). In nine cases, the PCI failed at the graft level, and seven underwent a native vessel revascularization. Native vessel treatment was performed in 20% of the study subjects, all with stents. Finally, medical management was decided in three cases. Events after treatment for IMA graft failure were frequent (50.8%), during a median follow-up of 7.5 years. Acute presentation (hazard ratioMACE = 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12–3.00, p

Gender-related differences in COVID-19 clinical presentation, disease progression, and mortality have not been adequately explored. We analyzed the clinical profile, presentation, treatments, and outcomes of patients according to gender in the HOPE-COVID-19 International Registry. Among 2,798 enrolled patients, 1,111 were women (39.7%). Male patients had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and more comorbidities at baseline. After propensity score matching, 876 men and 876 women were selected. Male patients more often reported fever, whereas female patients more often reported vomiting, diarrhea, and hyposmia/anosmia. Laboratory tests in men presented alterations consistent with a more severe COVID-19 infection (eg, significantly higher C-reactive protein, troponin, transaminases, lymphocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, and ferritin). Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, bilateral pneumonia, respiratory insufficiency, and renal failure were significantly more frequent in men. Men more often required pronation, corticosteroids, and tocilizumab administration. A significantly higher 30-day mortality was observed in men vs women (23.4% vs 19.2%; P = .039). Trial Numbers: NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions (OGD) are a frequent symptom of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has been proposed that the neuroinvasive potential of the novel SARS-CoV-2 could be due to olfactory bulb invasion, conversely studies suggest it could be a good prognostic factor. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prognosis value of OGD in COVID-19. These symptoms were recorded on admission from a cohort study of 5868 patients with confirmed or highly suspected COVID-19 infection included in the multicenter international HOPE Registry (NCT04334291). There was statistical relation in multivariate analysis for OGD in gender, more frequent in female 12.41% vs 8.67% in male, related to age, more frequent under 65 years, presence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoke, renal insufficiency, lung, heart, cancer and neurological disease. We did not find statistical differences in pregnant (p = 0.505), patient suffering cognitive (p = 0.484), liver (p = 0.1) or immune disease (p = 0.32). There was inverse relation (protective) between OGD and prone positioning (0.005) and death (

Background: Sepsis patients with a concomitant Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection are related to a high morbidity and mortality rate. We investigated a large cohort of sepsis patients with a concomitant COVID-19 to determine clinical characteristics, laboratory and radiological findings, and predictors of mortality. We developed a risk score for the estimation of sepsis risk in patients with COVID-19. Methods: In the present study, we conducted a sub-analysis from the international Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry for COVID-19 (HOPE-COVID-19-Registry). Out of 5,837 patients with COVID-19, 624 patients were diagnosed with sepsis according to the Sepsis-3 International Consensus. Findings: In multivariable analysis, the following risk factors were identified as independent predictors for developing sepsis: current smoking, tachypnoea (>22 breath per minute), haemoptysis, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) 1.5 mg/dl. By assigning odds ratio weighted points to these variables, the following three risk categories were defined to develop sepsis during admission: low-risk group (probability of sepsis 3.1-11.8%); intermediate-risk group (24.8-53.8%); high-risk-group (58.3-100%). A score of 1 was assigned to current smoking, tachypnoea, decreased SpO2, decreased blood pressure, decreased GCS, elevated PCT, TnI, and creatinine, whereas a score of 2 was assigned to haemoptysis. Interpretation: The HOPE Sepsis Score including 9 parameters is useful in identifying high-risk COVID-19 patients to develop sepsis. Sepsis in COVID-19 is associated with a high mortality rate. Funding Statement: Non-conditioned grant (FUNDACION INTERHOSPITALARIA PARA LA INVESTIGACION CARDIOVASCULAR, FIC. Madrid, Spain) Declaration of Interests: We declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee in all involved centres.

There is limited information on the presenting characteristics, prognosis, and therapeutic approaches of young patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to investigate the baseline characteristics, in-hospital treatment, and outcomes of a wide cohort

Previous works seem to agree in the higher mortality of cancer patients with COVID-19. Identifying potential prognostic factors upon admission could help identify patients with a poor prognosis.We aimed to explore the characteristics and evolution of COVID-19 cancer patients admitted to hospital in a multicenter international registry (HOPE COVID-19).Our primary objective is to define those characteristics that allow us to identify cancer patients with a worse prognosis (mortality within 30 days after the diagnosis of COVID-19).5838 patients have been collected in this registry, of whom 770 had cancer among their antecedents. In hospital mortality reached 258 patients (33.51%). The median was 75 years (65-82). Regarding the distribution by sex, 34.55% of the patients (266/770) were women.The distribution by type of cancer: genitourinary 238/745 (31.95%), digestive 124/745 (16.54%), hematologic 95/745 (12.75%).In multivariate regression analysis, factors that are independently associated with mortality at admission are: renal impairment (OR 3.45, CI 97.5% 1.85-6.58), heart disease (2.32, 1.47-3.66), liver disease (4.69, 1.94-11.62), partial dependence (2.41, 1.34-4.33), total dependence (7.21, 2.60-21.82), fatigue (1.84, 1.16-2.93), arthromialgias (0.45, 0.26-0.78), SatO2 92% (4.58, 2.97-7.17), elevated LDH (2.61, 1.51-4.69) and abnormal decreased Blood Pressure (3.57, 1.81-7.15). Analitical parameters are also significant altered.In patients with cancer from the HOPE registry, 30-day mortality from any cause is high and is associated with easily identifiable clinical factors upon arrival at the hospital. Identifying these patients can help initiate more intensive treatments from the start and evaluate the prognosis of these patients.Trabajos previos parecen coincidir en la mayor mortalidad de los pacientes con cáncer y COVID-19. La identificación de posibles factores pronósticos en el momento del ingreso podría ayudar a identificar a los pacientes con mal pronóstico.Nos propusimos explorar las características y la evolución de los pacientes con cáncer y COVID-19 ingresados en un registro internacional multicéntrico (HOPE COVID-19).Nuestro objetivo principal es definir aquellas características que nos permitan identificar a los pacientes con cáncer de peor pronóstico (mortalidad en los 30 días siguientes al diagnóstico de COVID-19).En este registro se ha recogido a 5.838 pacientes, de los cuales 770 tenían cáncer entre sus antecedentes. La mortalidad hospitalaria alcanzó a 258 pacientes (33,51%). La mediana fue de 75 años (65-82). En cuanto a la distribución por sexo, el 34,55% de los pacientes eran mujeres (266/770).La distribución por tipo de cáncer: genitourinario 238/745 (31,95%), digestivo 124/745 (16,54%) y hematológico 95/745 (12,75%).En el análisis de regresión multivariante, los factores que se asocian de forma independiente con la mortalidad al ingreso son: insuficiencia renal (OR 3,45; IC 97,5%: 1,85-6,58), cardiopatía (2,32; 1,47-3,66), hepatopatía (4,69; 1,94-11,62), dependencia parcial (2,41; 1,34-4,33), dependencia total (7,21; 2,60-21,82), fatiga (1,84, 1;16-2,93), artromialgias (0,45; 0,26-0,78), SatOEn los pacientes con cáncer del registro HOPE, la mortalidad a los 30 días por cualquier causa es elevada y se asocia a factores clínicos fácilmente identificables a su llegada al hospital. La identificación de estos pacientes puede ayudar a iniciar tratamientos más intensivos desde el principio y evaluar el pronóstico de estos pacientes.

The disease produced by the new coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2), named COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease-2019) has recently been classified as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). However, scarce clinical data is available and generally limited to the Chinese population due to the first cases were identified in Wuhan (Hubei, China). This article describes the rationale and design of the HOPE COVID-19 (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for COVID 19) registry ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04334291). With an ambispective cohort design, eligible patients are those discharged, deceased or alive, from any hospital center with a confirmed diagnosis or a COVID-19 high suspicion. With a current recruitment of more than 7000 cases, in 46 hospitals in 8 countries, since it is not possible to estimate the sample size based on literature reports, the investigators will try to get the maximum numbers of patients possible. The study primary objective is all cause mortality and aims to characterize the clinical profile of patients infected in order to develop a prognostic clinical score allowing, rapid logistic decision making. As secondary objectives, the analysis of other clinical events, the risk-adjusted influence of treatments and previous comorbidities of patients infected with the disease will be performed. The results of HOPE COVID-19 will contribute to a better understanding of this condition. We aim to describe the management of this condition as well as the outcomes in relation to the therapy chosen, in order to gain insight into improving patient care in the coming months. Clinical Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT04334291.

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has seriously challenged worldwide healthcare systems and limited intensive care facilities, leading to physicians considering the use of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) for managing SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure (ARF).MethodsWe conducted an interim analysis of the international, multicentre HOPE COVID-19 registry including patients admitted for a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection until 18 April 2020. Those treated with NIV were considered. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or need for intubation. The components of the composite endpoint were the secondary outcomes. Unadjusted and adjusted predictors of the primary endpoint within those initially treated with NIV were investigated.Results1933 patients who were included in the registry during the study period had data on oxygen support type. Among them, 390 patients (20%) were treated with NIV. Compared with those receiving other non-invasive oxygen strategy, patients receiving NIV showed significantly worse clinical and laboratory signs of ARF at presentation. Of the 390 patients treated with NIV, 173 patients (44.4%) met the composite endpoint. In-hospital death was the main determinant (147, 37.7%), while 62 patients (15.9%) needed invasive ventilation. Those requiring invasive ventilation had the lowest survival rate (41.9%). After adjustment, age (adjusted OR (adj(OR)) for 5-year increase: 1.37, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.63, p2 saturation ConclusionNIV was used in a significant proportion of patients within our cohort, and more than half of these patients survived without the need for intubation. NIV may represent a viable strategy particularly in case of overcrowded and limited intensive care resources, but prompt identification of failure is mandatory to avoid harm. Further studies are required to better clarify our hypothesis.Trial registration numbersNCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Despite its international aggressive extension, with a significant morbidity and mortality, the impact of renal function on its prognosis is uncertain. Methods Analysis from the international HOPE-Registry (NCT04334291). The objective was to evaluate the association between kidney failure severity on admission with the mortality of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients were categorized in 3 groups according to the estimated glomerular filtration rate on admission (eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, eGFR 30–60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and eGFR 60 vs eGFR 30-60 vs and eGFR

Background the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is characterized by poor outcomes and mortality, particularly in older patients. Methods post hoc analysis of the international, multicentre, ‘real-world’ HOPE COVID-19 registry. All patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 were selected. Epidemiological, clinical, analytical and outcome data were obtained. A comparative study between two age subgroups, 65–74 and ≥75 years, was performed. The primary endpoint was all cause in-hospital mortality. Results about, 1,520 patients aged ≥65 years (60.3% male, median age of 76 [IQR 71–83] years) were included. Comorbidities such as hypertension (69.2%), dyslipidaemia (48.6%), cardiovascular diseases (any chronic heart disease in 38.4% and cerebrovascular disease in 12.5%), and chronic lung disease (25.3%) were prevalent, and 49.6% were on ACEI/ARBs. Patients aged 75 years and older suffered more in-hospital complications (respiratory failure, heart failure, renal failure, sepsis) and a significantly higher mortality (18.4 vs. 48.2%, P < 0.001), but fewer admissions to intensive care units (11.2 vs. 4.8%). In the overall cohort, multivariable analysis demonstrated age ≥75 (OR 3.54), chronic kidney disease (OR 3.36), dementia (OR 8.06), peripheral oxygen saturation at admission 1 (OR 8.31) to be independent predictors of mortality. Conclusion patients aged ≥65 years hospitalised for COVID-19 had high rates of in-hospital complications and mortality, especially among patients 75 years or older. Age ≥75 years, dementia, peripheral oxygen saturation 1 were independent predictors of mortality in this population.

Background Coronary Aneurysms are a focal dilatation of an artery segment >1.5-fold the normal size of adjacent segments. Although some series have suggested a prevalence of 0.3–12%, data are lacking. In addition, they are not mentioned in practice guidelines. Our aim was investigate its prevalence, management and long-term outcomes. Methods and results The coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR) involved 32 hospitals across 9 countries in America and Europe. We reviewed 436,467 consecutive angiograms performed over the period 2004–2016. Finally, 1565 patients were recruited. Aneurysm global prevalence was 0.35%. Most patients were male (78.5%) with a mean age of 65 years and frequent cardiovascular risk factors. The main indication for angiogram was an acute coronary syndrome, 966 cases. The number of aneurisms was ≤2 per patient in 95.8% of the cases, mostly saccular, most frequently found in the left anterior descending and with numbers proportional with coronary stenosis. Aortopathies were related with more aneurysms too. Most patients received any revascularization procedure (69%), commonly percutaneous (53%). After a median follow-up of 37.2 months, 485 suffered a combined event (MACE) and 240 died. Without major differences comparing CABG vs PCI, MACE and death were more frequent in patients who received bare metal stents. Conclusions Coronary artery aneurysms are not uncommon. Usually, they are associated with coronary stenosis and high cardiovascular risk. Antiplatelet therapy seems reasonable and a percutaneous approach is safe and effective.

Objectives: This study sought to describe the incidence, determinants, and prognostic impact of cardiogenic shock (CS) in takotsubo syndrome (TTS).Background: TTS can be associated with sev...

Background Coronary aneurysms (1.5 times dilation the reference-vessel) are uncommon and have been diagnosed with increasing frequency with coronary angiography. The incidence varies from 1.5% to 5%. Reported complications are multiple: thrombosis, distal embolization, rupture and vasospasm, causing ischemia, heart failure or arrhythmias. However, the natural history and prognosis remains obscure. We aimed to describe the characteristics of acute patients with coronary aneurysms. Methods Prospective coronariography registry of patients with the diagnosis of coronary aneurysm between 2002 and 2013. Among 51,555 consecutive coronary angiograms, 414 patients with aneurysms were reported, of which 256 were considered acute (82% NSTE-ACS). Results Predominantly male (80%, mean age 65.5 years), cardiovascular risk factors were common (hypertension 65%, dyslipidemia 65%, obesity 25%, diabetes mellitus 28.5%, and smokers 67%). With frequent coronary stenoses (94%), mostly with one aneurysm (80%), it was observed more frequently in the anterior descending artery. After a median follow-up of 52 months, 53 died (14 cardiac causes) and 42% presented a cardiovascular event. Complications from the aneurysm were found in 4. The duration of dual antiplatelet therapy, LVEF, age and peripheral vascular disease highlighted in the multivariate analysis of death. Conclusion The presence of coronary aneurysms in patients undergoing coronary angiography with an acute event is low. Patients who present them also have a large burden of atherosclerotic risk factors. In the long-term, the probability of cardiovascular complications is high, but only a small proportion are due to the aneurysm itself. A more intense and prolonged antithrombotic treatment may result in lower mortality rates.

Sr. Editor: En los últimos años se ha incrementado el número de intervenciones transmitidas en directo, generalmente en el contexto de cursos médicos pero, en ocasiones, con cierta polémica1,2. En cardiología, el primer caso de angioplastia coronaria en directo tuvo lugar en Zúrich en 19801,2. Algunos han manifestado su preocupación por el potencial riesgo del paciente basándose en diversos argumentos y en que podrían no aportar ventajas docentes respecto a casos «enlatados/grabados». Además de la complejidad técnica, se apreciaría cierta presión sobre los operadores. Sin embargo, otros apuestan decididamente por ellos, considerando el valor didáctico que bien realizados y seleccionados pueden tener, sin detrimento en resultados o seguridad3,4. Así, en el estudio VERITAS se compararon 60 retransmisiones de implante percutáneo de válvula aórtica (TAVI) con 42 procedimientos similares de control, y se concluyó que la retransmisión de procedimientos de TAVI por parte de operadores experimentados se puede realizar de manera segura y obteniendo resultados similares a los habituales4. Además, se han publicado documentos de consenso que ofrecen recomendaciones y se han llevado a cabo reuniones de expertos, auspiciadas entre otras por la Sociedad Europea de Cardiología (VITAL-Live2), para definir la organización de cursos con casos en directo3. El principal objetivo de este estudio fue...

To the Editor, Over the last few years the number of procedures that have been broadcast live—often at medical meetings—has been growing exponentially. Still, this is a controversial issue.1,2 In cardiology, the very first case of a coronary angioplasty broadcast live took place in Zurich back in 1980.1,2 Some say that there is a potential risk for patients, and they share different arguments claiming that live broadcasts may bring no educational benefits at all compared to cases already filmed or recorded. Added to the technical complexity involved, there would be more pressure to the operators themselves. However, others are true defenders of these broadcasts mentioning their educational value when performed correctly with selected cases claiming that this should not be detrimental at all to results or safety.3,4 Thus, the VERITAS study compared 60 transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) broadcasts to 42 similar control procedures and concluded that, if performed by experienced operators, broadcasting TAVI procedures live is safe and results are similar to the usual ones.4 Also, consensus documents have been published with recommendations, and several meetings have been held and hosted by the European Society of Cardiology (VITAL-Live2) to define how courses with live cases should work.3 The primary endpoint of this study...

Coronary artery aneurysm is defined as a coronary dilation that exceeds the diameter of adjacent segments or the diameter of the patient's largest normal coronary vessel by 1.5×. It is an uncommon disease that has been diagnosed with increasing frequency since the widespread appearance of coronary angiography. The published incidence varies from 1.5% to 5%, suggesting male dominance and a predilection for the right coronary artery. Although several causes have been described, atherosclerosis accounts for ≥50% of coronary aneurysms in adults. Reported complications include thrombosis and distal embolization, rupture, and vasospasm, causing ischemia, heart failure, or arrhythmias. The natural history and prognosis remain unknown, as definitive data are scarce. Controversies persist regarding the use of medical management (antithrombotic therapy) or interventional/surgical procedures. Only some case reports or small case series are available about this condition. The Coronary Artery Aneurysm Registry (CAAR; http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02563626","term_id":"NCT02563626"}}NCT02563626) is a multicenter international ambispective registry that aims to provide insights on anatomic, epidemiologic, and clinical aspects of this substantially unknown entity. In addition, the registry will assess management strategies (conservative, interventional, or surgical) and their short‐ and long‐term results in a large cohort of patients. Clinical Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02563626","term_id":"NCT02563626"}}NCT02563626.

Background Coronary Aneurysms are a focal dilatation of an artery segment of >1.5-fold the normal size of adjacent segments. Some limited series suggested an incidence of 0.3–12%. However, coronary aneurysms are not mentioned in practice guidelines and several questions remain unanswered. Purpose To investigate its clinical profile, prognostic predictors, and long term outcomes. Methods The coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR, NCT02563626) is a collaborative effort involving 32 hospitals across 9 countries (Canada, Cuba, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, USA and Uruguay). When eligibility was uncertain, cases were reviewed by a core lab. Results We reviewed 436,467 consecutive angiographies between 2004–2016. 1,565 patients were ambispectively included. Global incidence was 0.35%. Most were male (78.5%) with a mean age of 65 years. Cardiovascular risk factors were frequent. An aortopathy history was present in 8.7% but a Kawasaki antecedent was unfrequent (0.3%). The main indication for cath was an ACS in 966 cases. Most aneurysms were saccular and 82 giant. The number of aneurisms was low, mainly with 1–2 (95.8%) and only 3 patients with ≥6, proportionally with more coronary stenosis. The most affected artery was the LAD. Aortopathy was related with higher number of aneurysms. Most received any revascularization, commonly percutaneous (PCI). During a follow-up of 37.2 months, 485 suffered a MACE, (death/heart failure/unstable angina/reinfarction) and 240 died. Age, race, diabetes, renal failure, peripheral disease, acute cath, coronary stenosis, LVEF and anticoagulation remained as predictors of death/MACE after multivariate adjustments, without no major differences comparing CABG vs PCI. No restenosis was found in aneurysm with DES but those with BMS suffered 4 (p=0.002). MACE and death were more frequent in patients who received BMS. Figure 1 Conclusions Coronary aneurysmal disease is not uncommon. It is associated with severe coronary stenosis and a high cardiovascular risk burden, pointing out an aggressive atherosclerotic status. Antiplatelet therapy is a reasonable option and interventional procedures safe and effective, compared with surgery. Drug eluting stents should be preferred as the default strategy. Acknowledgement/Funding None

Therapeutic strategies - such as duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after coronary artery stenting - usually generate a large quantity of meta-analyses. The meta-analyses that include the same randomized clinical trials should produce similar results. Our aim in the study is to analyze the quality and to compare the results of meta-analyses focused on a controversial topic such as dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. We searched all published meta-analyses published up to November 2015 (near DAPT trial publication) selecting those that included the same randomized clinical trials comparing patterns of briefer versus longer-term double antiplatelet therapy. Seventeen meta-analyses achieved our selection criteria. Of the seventeen analyzed, we identified seven (41.1%) based on the same ten randomized clinical trials (RCTs), yet their results varied widely. Many of the meta-analyses differed in only some minor aspect of the design (i.e. eligible studies, length of comparators and statistical methods used). Some authors differed in the number of patients participating in RCTs and even, despite reviewing the same underlying trials, only 2 of the 7 meta-analyses included the same number of patients. Meta-analyses around cardiovascular, all-cause or non-cardiovascular death differ frequently. In the DAPT duration setting, several meta-analyses have been recently published based on the same data, presenting several issues making it difficult to determine clear recommendations on certain points. IN receives research funding from Astrazeneca; has received minor consulting fees from Boston, Medtronic, Astrazeneca; and speaking fees or support for attending scientificmeetings fromBoehringer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Lilly, AstraZeneca and Pfizer. AE is Astrazeneca employee. HB receives research funding from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (PIE16/00021), AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen and Novartis; has received consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Novartis; and speaking fees or support for attending scientificmeetings from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, Ferrer, Novartis, Servier and MEDSCAPE-the heart.og. The other authors pose no relevant disclosures regarding this manuscript. Sí

Background There is ongoing debate about whether a computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) should be aborted when the calcium score (CS) exceeds a certain threshold in patients with chest pain. The aim of this study was to discover whether specific "cutpoints" regarding coronary artery CS could be determined to predict severe coronary stenoses assessed by CTCA, thus identifying patients amenable to an invasive diagnostic approach. Methods 294 consecutive patients with chest pain of uncertain cause who were referred for non-invasive diagnostic CTCA were included. Subjects underwent Agatston CS and CTCA using current 64-slice technology. Results Severe coronary stenoses were noted in 75 of 294 (25.1%) patients on CTCA. A very high prevalence of severe coronary stenoses was found in patients with CS ≥400 (87.0%). The CS had area under the ROC curve 0.86 to predict severe coronary stenoses on CTCA. The best discriminant cut-off point was CS ≥400 (sensitivity of 55.3%, specificity of 93.5, positive predictive value of 85.8%, negative predictive value of 84.0%). Multivariable logistic regression analysis controlling for traditional risk factors showed CS ≥400 remained an independent predictor of severe coronary stenoses on CTCA (OR 14.553, 95% confidence interval 4.043 to 52.384, p Conclusions CS can be used as a "gatekeeper" to CTCA in patients with chest pain. Due to the very high prevalence of severe coronary stenoses in patients with CS ≥400, further evaluation with CTCA is not warranted as these patients should be referred to invasive coronary angiography, avoiding the repeated exposure to ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast.