Aims We performed a systematic review to summarize the clinical features, diagnostic methods, treatment, and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with pericarditis. Methods We searched electronic databases from inception to 17 December 2020. Studies that reported clinical data on patients with COVID-19 and pericarditis were included. Descriptive statistics were used for categorical and continuous variables [mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range)]. As an exploratory analysis, differences between patients with acute pericarditis and myopericarditis were compared. Results A total of 33 studies (32 case reports and 1 case series) involving 34 patients were included. The mean age was 51.6 ± 19.5 years and 62% of patients were men. Sixty-two percentage of patients were diagnosed with myopericarditis. The most frequent electrocardiographic pattern (56%) was diffuse ST-elevation and PR depression. Pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade were reported in 76 and 35% of cases, respectively. The median values of C-reactive protein [77 mg/dl (12–177)] and white blood cells [12 335 cells/μl (5625–16 500)] were above the normal range. Thirty-eight percent and 53% of patients were treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and colchicine, respectively. These drugs were more frequently used in patients with acute pericarditis compared with myopericarditis. The in-hospital mortality was 6% without a significant difference between both groups. Conclusion Our review shows that COVID-19 patients with pericarditis had similar clinical features to other viral cardiotropic infections. However, NSAIDs and colchicine were used in half or less of the cases. Overall, the short-term prognosis was good across groups.

Objectives There is conflicting evidence about the utility of statins use on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effect of statins use on mortality in COVID-19 patients. Methods We searched electronic databases from inception to March 3, 2021. We pooled unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using random-effects models. Results Twenty-five cohort studies involving 147824 patients were included. The mean age ranged from 44.9 to 70.9 years and 57% of patients were men. The use of statins was not associated with mortality using unadjusted risk ratio (uRR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.86-1.57, 19 studies). In contrast, meta-analyses of adjusted odds ratio (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.86, 11 studies) and adjusted hazard ratio (aHR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.91, 10 studies) showed that statins were independently associated with a significant reduction of mortality. Subgroup analyses showed that only chronic use of statins significantly reduced mortality according to the adjusted models. Conclusions The use of statins was associated with a lower risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients based on adjusted effects of cohort studies. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed to confirm these findings.

Importance: There is a controversy regarding whether or not to continue angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To evaluate the association between ACEIs or ARBs use and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Data Sources: Systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to May 31, 2020. We also searched the preprint servers medRxiv and SSNR for additional studies. Study Selection: Observational studies and randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of ACEIs or ARBs use on clinical outcomes of adult patients with COVID-19. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Risk of bias of observational studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects models and effects expressed as Odds ratios (OR) and mean differences with their 95% confidence interval (95%CI). If available, adjusted effects were pooled. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes were COVID-19 severity, hospital discharge, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and troponin, creatinine, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and D-dimer levels. Results: 40 studies (21 cross-sectional, two case-control, and 17 cohorts) involving 50615 patients were included. ACEIs or ARBs use was not associated with all-cause mortality overall (OR 1.11, 95%CI 0.77-1.60, p=0.56), in subgroups by study design and using adjusted effects. ACEI or ARB use was independently associated with lower COVID-19 severity (aOR 0.56, 95%CI 0.37-0.87, p<0.01). No significant associations were found between ACEIs or ARBs use and hospital discharge, hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and biomarkers. Conclusions and Relevance: ACEIs or ARBs use was not associated with higher all-cause mortality in COVID-19. However, ACEI or ARB use was independently associated with lower COVID-19 severity. Our results support the current international guidelines to continue the use of ACEIs and ARBs in COVID-19 patients with hypertension.

Purpose: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are drugs that were used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the early pandemic period. It is well-known that these agents can prolong the QTc interval and potentially induce Torsades de Pointes (TdP). We aim to assess the prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients treated with these drugs.Methods: We searched electronic databases from inception to September 30, 2020 for studies reporting peak QTc ≥500 ms, peak QTc change ≥60 ms, peak QTc interval, peak change of QTc interval, ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, or atrioventricular block (AVB). All meta-analyses were conducted using a randomeffects model. Results: Forty-seven studies (three case series, 35 cohorts, and nine randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 13 087 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of peak QTc ≥500 ms was 9% (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 3%-18%) and 8% (95%CI, 3%-14%) in patients who received hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin, respectively. Likewise, the use of hydroxychloroquine (risk ratio [RR], 2.68; 95%CI, 1.56-4.60) and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (RR, 3.28; 95%CI, 1.16-9.30) was associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation compared to no treatment. Ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, and AVB were reported in <1% of patients across treatment groups.The only two studies that reported individual data of lopinavir/ritonavir found no cases of QTc prolongation.Conclusions: COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine with or without azithromycin had a relatively high prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation. However, the prevalence of arrhythmic events was very low, probably due to underreporting. The limited information about lopinavir/ritonavir showed that it does not prolong the QTc interval.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause a wide range of cardiovascular diseases, including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and STEMI-mimickers (such as myocarditis, Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, among others). We performed a systematic review to summarize the clinical features, management, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who had ST-segment elevation. We searched electronic databases from inception to September 30, 2020 for studies that reported clinical data about COVID-19 patients with ST-segment elevation. Differences between patients with and without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) on coronary angiography were evaluated. Forty-two studies (35 case reports and seven case series) involving 161 patients were included. The mean age was 62.7 ± 13.6 years and 75% were men. The most frequent symptom was chest pain (78%). Eighty-three percent of patients had obstructive CAD. Patients with non-obstructive CAD had more diffuse ST-segment elevation (13% versus 1%, p = 0.03) and diffuse left ventricular wall-motion abnormality (23% versus 3%, p = 0.02) compared to obstructive CAD. In patients with previous coronary stent (n = 17), the 76% presented with stent thrombosis. In the majority of cases, the main reperfusion strategy was primary percutaneous coronary intervention instead of fibrinolysis. The in-hospital mortality was 30% without difference between patients with (30%) or without (31%) obstructive CAD. Our data suggest that a relatively high proportion of COVID-19 patients with ST-segment elevation had non-obstructive CAD. The prognosis was poor across groups. However, our findings are based on case reports and case series that should be confirmed in future studies. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11239-021-02411-9.

There is limited evidence about the prognostic utility of right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 . We assessed the association between RVD and mortality in COVID-19 patients. We searched electronic databases from inception to February 15, 2021. RVD was defined based on the following echocardiographic variables: tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), tricuspid S 0 peak systolic velocity, fractional area change (FAC), and right ventricular free wall longitudinal strain (RVFWLS). All meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Nineteen cohort studies involving 2307 patients were included. The mean age ranged from 59 to 72 years and 65% of patients were male. TAPSE (mean difference [MD], À3.13 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], À4.08-À2.19), tricuspid S 0 peak systolic velocity (MD, À0.88 cm/s; 95% CI, À1.68 to À0.08), FAC (MD, À3.47%; 95% CI, À6.21 to À0.72), and RVFWLS (MD, À5.83%; 95% CI, À7.47-À4.20

Despite limited exposure and training, Peruvian medical students aspire to practice shared decision making but their current attitude reflects the less participatory approaches they see role modeled by their teachers.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic represents a major concern in immunosuppressed patients such as heart transplant recipients. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to summarize the clinical features, treatment, and outcomes of heart transplant recipients with COVID‐19. We searched electronic databases from inception to January 11, 2021. Thirty‐nine articles (22 case reports and 17 cohorts) involving 415 patients were included. The mean age was 59.9 ± 15.7 years and 77% of patients were men. In cohort studies including outpatients and inpatients, the hospitalization rate was 77%. The most common symptoms were fever (70%) and cough (67%). Inflammatory biomarkers (C‐reactive protein and procalcitonin) were above the normal range. Forty‐eight percent of patients presented with severe or critical COVID‐19. Hydroxychloroquine (54%), azithromycin (14%), and lopinavir/ritonavir (14%) were the most commonly used drugs. Forty‐nine percent of patients discontinued the baseline regimen of antimetabolites. In contrast, 59% and 73% continued the same regimen of calcineurin inhibitors and corticosteroids, respectively. Short‐term mortality among cohorts limited to inpatients was 25%. Our review suggests that heart transplant recipients with COVID‐19 exhibited similar demographic and clinical features to the general population. However, the prognosis was poor in these patients.