(1) Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) penetrates the respiratory epithelium through angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) binding. Myocardial and endothelial expression of ACE2 could account for the growing body of reported evidence of myocardial injury in severe forms of Human Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to provide insight into the impact of troponin (hsTnI) elevation on SARS-CoV-2 outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. (2) Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of hospitalized adult patients with the SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to a university hospital in France. The observation period ended at hospital discharge. (3) Results: During the study period, 772 adult, symptomatic COVID-19 patients were hospitalized for more than 24 h in our institution, of whom 375 had a hsTnI measurement and were included in this analysis. The median age was 66 (55–74) years, and there were 67% of men. Overall, 205 (55%) patients were placed under mechanical ventilation and 90 (24%) died. A rise in hsTnI was noted in 34% of the cohort, whereas only three patients had acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and one case of myocarditis. Death occurred more frequently in patients with hsTnI elevation (HR 3.95, 95% CI 2.69–5.71). In the multivariate regression model, a rise in hsTnI was independently associated with mortality (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.49–6.65) as well as age ≥ 65 years old (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.45–7.18) and CRP ≥ 100 mg/L (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.12–13.98). After performing a sensitivity analysis for the missing values of hsTnI, troponin elevation remained independently and significantly associated with death (OR 3.84, 95% CI 1.78–8.28). (4) Conclusion: Our study showed a four-fold increased risk of death in the case of a rise in hsTnI, underlining the prognostic value of troponin assessment in the COVID-19 context.
Background: The prognostic significance of coexisting deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is controversial. This study aimed to provide routine patient care data on the impact of this association on PE severity and 3-month outcomes in a population presenting with symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) from the REMOTEV registry. Methods and Results: REMOTEV is a prospective, non-interventional study of patients with acute symptomatic VTE, treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) or standard anticoagulation (vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or parenteral heparin/fondaparinux alone) for at least 3 months. From 1 November 2013 to 28 February 2018, among 1241 consecutive patients included, 1192 had a follow-up of at least 3 months and, among them, 1037 had PE with (727) or without DVT (310). The median age was 69 (55–80, 25th–75th percentiles). Patients with PE-associated DVT had more severe forms of PE (p < 0.0001) and, when DVT was present, proximal location was significantly correlated to PE severity (p < 0.01). However, no difference in all-cause mortality rate (hazard ratio (HR) 1.36 (CI 95% 0.69–2.92)), nor in the composite criterion of all-cause mortality and recurrence rate (HR 1.56 (CI 95% 0.83–3.10)) was noted at 3 months of follow-up. Conclusion: In REMOTEV, coexisting DVT was associated with a higher severity of PE, with no impact on short-term prognosis.
Dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers are a known substrate for the cytochrome P450 isoform 3A4. Rifampicin, an antitubercular agent, is one of the most potent inducers of hepatic and intestinal CYP3A4 thus increasing dihydropyridine metabolism. We report a case of a 67-year-old hypertensive female treated with a four-drug antihypertensive regimen including a dihydropyridine (nicardipine 50 mg bid), who was admitted for septic arthritis of the knee requiring antibiotic treatment with teicoplanin 400 mg od and rifampicin 600 mg bid. Six days after rifampicin initiation, she presented with Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome due to uncontrolled hypertension. We hypothesized that disequilibrium of previously controlled hypertension was partially due to nicardipine ineffectiveness. Plasma nicardipine concentration was assessed through high-performance liquid chromatography 5 hours after coadministration of the two drugs and proved undetectable.
The pleiotropic effects of statins, beyond their cholesterol-lowering properties, are much debated. In primary prevention, several observational cohort and case-control studies appear to show that statins reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism by about 30%. In a single randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial (JUPITER), which included 17,000 patients, rosuvastatin 20mg/day reduced the risk of venous thromboembolism by 43%. However, these patients were at low risk of venous thromboembolism, and the frequency of the event was, in principle, low. In secondary prevention, several observational studies and post-hoc analyses of randomized clinical trials have suggested that statins may prevent recurrence of venous thromboembolism. However, none of these studies had enough scientific weight to form the basis of a recommendation to use statins for secondary prevention. The putative preventive effect of statins appears to be independent of plasma cholesterol concentration and could be a pharmacological property of the statin class, although a dose-effect relationship has not been demonstrated. The mechanism through which statins might prevent venous thrombosis is thought to involve their anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects or perhaps a more specific action, by blocking the degradation of antithrombotic proteins. A mechanism involving the action of statins on interactions between risk factors for atherosclerosis and venous thromboembolism is supported by some studies, but not all. In the absence of firm evidence, statins cannot currently be recommended for primary or secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.