Search

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is a respiratory disease associated with thrombotic outcomes with coagulation and endothelial disorders. Based on that, several anticoagulation guidelines have been proposed. We aimed to determine whether anticoagulation therapy modifies the risk of developing severe COVID‐19. Methods and Results Patients with COVID‐19 initially admitted in medical wards of 24 French hospitals were included prospectively from February 26 to April 20, 2020. We used a Poisson regression model, Cox proportional hazard model, and matched propensity score to assess the effect of anticoagulation on outcomes (intensive care unit admission or in‐hospital mortality). The study enrolled 2878 patients with COVID‐19, among whom 382 (13.2%) were treated with oral anticoagulation therapy before hospitalization. After adjustment, anticoagulation therapy before hospitalization was associated with a better prognosis with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55–0.88). Analyses performed using propensity score matching confirmed that anticoagulation therapy before hospitalization was associated with a better prognosis, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.43 (95% CI, 0.29–0.63) for intensive care unit admission and adjusted hazard ratio of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.61–0.98) for composite criteria intensive care unit admission or death. In contrast, therapeutic or prophylactic low‐ or high‐dose anticoagulation started during hospitalization were not associated with any of the outcomes. Conclusions Anticoagulation therapy used before hospitalization in medical wards was associated with a better prognosis in contrast with anticoagulation initiated during hospitalization. Anticoagulation therapy introduced in early disease could better prevent COVID‐19–associated coagulopathy and endotheliopathy, and lead to a better prognosis.

Background A risk model has been proposed to provide a patient individualized estimation of risk for major clinical events (heart failure events, ventricular arrhythmia, all‐cause mortality) in patients with transposition of the great arteries and atrial switch surgery. We aimed to externally validate the model. Methods and Results A retrospective, multicentric, longitudinal cohort of 417 patients with transposition of the great arteries (median age, 24 years at baseline [interquartile range, 18–30]; 63% men) independent of the model development and internal validation cohort was studied. The performance of the prediction model in predicting risk at 5 years was assessed, and additional predictors of major clinical events were evaluated separately in our cohort. Twenty‐five patients (5.9%) met the major clinical events end point within 5 years. Model validation showed good discrimination between high and low 5‐year risk patients (Harrell C index of 0.73 [95% CI, 0.65–0.81]) but tended to overestimate this risk (calibration slope of 0.20 [95% CI, 0.03–0.36]). In our population, the strongest independent predictors of major clinical events were a history of heart failure and at least mild impairment of the subpulmonary left ventricle function. Conclusions We reported the first external validation of a major clinical events risk model in a large cohort of adults with transposition of the great arteries. The model allows for distinguishing patients at low risk from those at intermediate to high risk. Previous episode of heart failure and subpulmonary left ventricle dysfunction appear to be key markers in the prognosis of patients. Further optimizing risk models are needed to individualize risk predictions in patients with transposition of the great arteries.

Congenital heart disease (CHD) often involves the systemic right ventricle (SRV), which is the morphological right ventricle that supports systemic circulation. SRV patients are at a higher risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) than other adult CHD patients and continues to be a significant cause of death in this aging population. However, the pathophysiology of ventricular arrhythmias in SRV is still not fully understood, and there may be differences between subtypes of CHD. Although these events are rare, predicting them is challenging. This review discusses contemporary strategies for assessing and preventing the risk of ventricular arrhythmias in SRV patients. Several risk factors have been identified to be associated with ventricular arrhythmias in patients with SRV. A recent risk stratification model combines independently associated factors into a risk score, and subpulmonary left ventricle dysfunction is emerging as a critical factor in risk assessment. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, biomarkers, and genetic data may refine the ability to predict ventricular arrhythmias in SRV. However, the question of whether implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) should be used as a preventive measure in this cohort remains unanswered. Multicenter studies are needed to evaluate risk models and ICD use in this aging population. Given that ICDs have drawbacks, such as a high rate of inappropriate shocks and late lead-related complications, shared clinical decision-making is crucial when considering their use. The review emphasizes the need for further research in this area to improve the identification of patients at risk of clinical ventricular arrhythmias and to develop effective prevention strategies.

The important increase in life expectancy of adult patients with congenital heart disease (ACHD) has generated new challenges, including arrhythmias that represent one of the main late complications. Reentrant atrial arrhythmias are by far the main mechanism encountered, and catheter ablation has been now presented as a first-line therapy in this patient population. The number of procedures is expected to continuously increase year after year. The heterogeneity and complexity of phenotypes encountered require these cases to be performed by highly experienced operators, in specialized centers with multidisciplinary competencies. A thorough knowledge and understanding of anatomic specificities, vascular access issues, and main circuits encountered according to underlying phenotype is essential. Acute success rates have significantly improved and are now excellent, but recurrences remain a common issue, with different mechanisms or circuits frequently encountered. Observational data have suggested the interest of systematically targeting all inducible atrial arrhythmias, whether previously documented or not, and a lot of hope and research is based on the prediction of arrhythmia substrate before arrhythmia development by imaging or electroanatomic mapping to deliver a prophylactic patient tailored ablation approach. In this review, we summarize those different points in the most common or distinctive defects to offer a didactic overview of atrial flutter catheter ablation in ACHD patients.

BackgroundThe decision for withholding and withdrawing of life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) in COVID-19 patients is currently based on a collegial and mainly clinical assessment. In the context of a global pandemic and overwhelmed health system, the question of LST decision support for COVID-19 patients using prognostic biomarkers arises.MethodsIn a multicenter study in 24 French hospitals, 2878 COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical departments from 26 February to 20 April 2020 were included. In a propensity-matched population, we compared the clinical, biological, and management characteristics and survival of patients with and without LST decision using Student's t-test, the chi-square test, and the Cox model, respectively.ResultsAn LST was decided for 591 COVID-19 patients (20.5%). These 591 patients with LST decision were secondarily matched (1:1) based on age, sex, body mass index, and cancer history with 591 COVID-19 patients with no LST decision. The patients with LST decision had significantly more cardiovascular diseases, such as high blood pressure (72.9 vs. 66.7%, p = 0.02), stroke (19.3 vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001), renal failure (30.4 vs. 17.4%, p < 0.001), and heart disease (22.5 vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001). Upon admission, LST patients were more severely attested by a qSOFA score ≥2 (66.5 vs. 58.8%, p = 0.03). Biologically, LST patients had significantly higher values of D-dimer, markers of heart failure (BNP and NT-pro-BNP), and renal damage (creatinine) (p < 0.001). Their evolutions were more often unfavorable (in-hospital mortality) than patients with no LST decision (41.5 vs. 10.3%, p < 0.001). By combining the three biomarkers (D-dimer, BNP and/or NT-proBNP, and creatinine), the proportion of LST increased significantly with the number of abnormally high biomarkers (24, 41.3, 48.3, and 60%, respectively, for none, one, two, and three high values of biomarkers, trend p < 0.01).ConclusionThe concomitant increase in D-dimer, BNP/NT-proBNP, and creatinine during the admission of a COVID-19 patient could represent a reliable and helpful tool for LST decision. Circulating biomarker might potentially provide additional information for LST decision in COVID-19.

Background: Atrial arrhythmias are common complications in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD) and are associated with high morbi-mortality. Atrial tachycardia (AT) including intra-atrial reentrant tachycardia and focal atrial tachycardia are the most prevalent arrhythmias in ACHD. We aimed to compare mid-term outcomes according to arrhythmia management. Methods: All hospitalizations for AT in ACHD were retrospectively identified from medico-administrative database from September 2006 to September 2016 in two centers. Outcomes of patients with AT managed with direct-current cardioversion (DCCV) were compared with patients referred for catheter ablation (CA). Atrial arrhythmia recurrence, stroke, admission for heart failure and death were analyzed during follow-up. Results: One hundred and twenty-one ACHD with AT (median age 41 [IQR 32–52] years, male 62%, 41% moderate CHD and 38% complex CHD) were included. Median follow-up was 3.3 years [IQR 1.4–6.2]. Thirty-seven (30.5%) patients underwent DCCV and 84 (69.5%) CA. No significant difference in age, CHD complexity, history of atrial arrhythmia, heart failure, and CHA2DS2-VASC score were observe. Patients undergoing DCCV had higher NYHA class. Atrial arrhythmia recurrence was lower in CA group (Log-rank test, p ​= ​0.045). Most recurrences were AT, but atrial fibrillation was recorded in 35.1% after DCCV and 9.5% after CA (p ​= ​0.001). At the end of follow-up, patients who were initially treated by CA had a significantly lower incidence of severe cardiovascular events (48.6% in DCCV group vs. 16.7% in CA group, HR: 0.46, CI 95%: 0.22–0.93, p ​= ​0.031). Conclusions: A proactive management of AT by CA is associated with better long-term outcomes in ACHD.

Background: Microthrombosis and large-vessel thrombosis are the main triggers of COVID-19 worsening. The optimal anticoagulant regimen in COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards remains unknown.Objectives: To evaluate the effects of intermediate-dose vs. standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (AC) among patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in medical wards.Methods and results: We used a large French multicentric retrospective study enrolling 2,878 COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards. After exclusion of patients who had an AC treatment before hospitalization, we generated a propensity-score-matched cohort of patients who were treated with intermediate-dose or standard-dose prophylactic AC between February 26 and April 20, 2020 (intermediate-dose, n = 261; standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, n = 763). The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality; this occurred in 23 of 261 (8.8%) patients in the intermediate-dose group and 74 of 783 (9.4%) patients in the standard-dose prophylactic AC group (p = 0.85); while time to death was also the same in both the treatment groups (11.5 and 11.6 days, respectively, p = 0.17). We did not observe any difference regarding venous and arterial thrombotic events between the intermediate dose and standard dose, respectively (venous thrombotic events: 2.3 vs. 2.4%, p=0.99; arterial thrombotic events: 2.7 vs. 1.2%, p = 0.25). The 30-day Kaplan–Meier curves for in-hospital mortality demonstrate no statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality (HR: 0.99 (0.63–1.60); p = 0.99). Moreover, we found that no particular subgroup was associated with a significant reduction in in-hospital mortality.Conclusion: Among COVID-19 patients hospitalized in medical wards, intermediate-dose prophylactic AC compared with standard-dose prophylactic AC did not result in a significant difference in in-hospital mortality.

Summary: Background: Although mortality due to COVID-19 is, for the most part, robustly tracked, its indirect effect at the population level through lockdown, lifestyle changes, and reorganisation of health-care systems has not been evaluated. We aimed to assess the incidence and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in an urban region during the pandemic, compared with non-pandemic periods. Methods: We did a population-based, observational study using data for non-traumatic OHCA (N=30 768), systematically collected since May 15, 2011, in Paris and its suburbs, France, using the Paris Fire Brigade database, together with in-hospital data. We evaluated OHCA incidence and outcomes over a 6-week period during the pandemic in adult inhabitants of the study area. Findings: Comparing the 521 OHCAs of the pandemic period (March 16 to April 26, 2020) to the mean of the 3052 total of the same weeks in the non-pandemic period (weeks 12–17, 2012–19), the maximum weekly OHCA incidence increased from 13·42 (95% CI 12·77–14·07) to 26·64 (25·72–27·53) per million inhabitants (p

Major advances in pediatric cardiology in recent decades, especially surgical techniques, have resulted in an increasing number of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) surviving to adulthood. This has generated new challenges, particularly with regards to the late onset of complex arrhythmias. Abnormal anatomy, surgical scarring, chronic hypoxemia, hemodynamic compromise, neuro-hormonal abnormalities, and genetic factors can all contribute to creating a unique substrate for arrhythmia development. This review attempts to synthesize the current state of knowledge spanning the spectrum from underlying mechanisms of arrhythmias in patients with congenital heart disease to current ablative strategies. We discuss existing knowledge gaps and highlight important areas for future research.

Although 18–45-year-old (y-o) patients represent a significant proportion of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, data concerning the young population remain scarce. The Critical COVID France (CCF) study was an observational study including consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in 24 centers between 26 February and 20 April 2020. The primary composite outcome included transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) or in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular (CV) complications. Among 2868 patients, 321 (11.2%) patients were in the 18–45-y-o range. In comparison with older patients, young patients were more likely to have class 2 obesity and less likely to have hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia. The primary outcome occurred less frequently in 18–45-y-o patients in comparison with patients > 45 years old (y/o) (16.8% vs. 30.7%, p < 0.001). The 18–45-y-o patients presented with pericarditis (2.2% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.003) and myocarditis (2.5% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.002) more frequently than patients >45 y/o. Acute heart failure occurred less frequently in 18–45-y-o patients (0.9% vs. 7.2%, p < 0.001), while thrombotic complications were similar in young and older patients. Whereas both transfer to the ICU and in-hospital death occurred less frequently in young patients, COVID-19 seemed to have a particular CV impact in this population.