No abstract

Background Obesity has been described as a protective factor in cardiovascular and other diseases being expressed as ‘obesity paradox’. However, the impact of obesity on clinical outcomes including mortality in COVID-19 has been poorly systematically investigated until now. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients divided into three groups according to the body mass index (BMI). Methods We retrospectively collected data up to May 31 st , 2020. 3635 patients were divided into three groups of BMI (<25 kg/m 2 ; n = 1110, 25-30 kg/m 2 ; n = 1464, and >30 kg/m 2 ; n = 1061). Demographic, in-hospital complications, and predictors for mortality, respiratory insufficiency, and sepsis were analyzed. Results The rate of respiratory insufficiency was more recorded in BMI 25-30 kg/m 2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m 2 (22.8% vs. 41.8%; p < 0.001), and in BMI > 30 kg/m 2 than BMI < 25 kg/m 2 , respectively (22.8% vs. 35.4%; p < 0.001). Sepsis was more observed in BMI 25-30 kg/m 2 and BMI > 30 kg/m 2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m 2 , respectively (25.1% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.02) and (25.1% vs. 32.5%; p = 0.006). The mortality rate was higher in BMI 25-30 kg/m 2 and BMI > 30 kg/m 2 as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m 2 , respectively (27.2% vs. 39.2%; p = 0.31) (27.2% vs. 33.5%; p = 0.004). In the Cox multivariate analysis for mortality, BMI < 25 kg/m 2 and BMI > 30 kg/m 2 did not impact the mortality rate (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.889-1.508; p = 0.27) (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.893-1.479; p = 0.27). In multivariate logistic regression analyses for respiratory insufficiency and sepsis, BMI < 25 kg/m 2 is determined as an independent predictor for reduction of respiratory insufficiency (OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.538-1.004; p = 0.05). Conclusions HOPE COVID-19-Registry revealed no evidence of obesity paradox in patients with COVID-19. However, Obesity was associated with a higher rate of respiratory insufficiency and sepsis but was not determined as an independent predictor for a high mortality.

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<0.05 for all). However, we did not find differences regarding the hospital use of RASi and the development of heart failure. CONCLUSION RASi historic use, at admission, is not related to an adjusted worse prognosis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, although it points out a high-risk population. In this setting, the in-hospital prescription of RASi is associated with improved survival and fewer short-term complications.

Although numerous patient‐specific co‐factors have been shown to be associated with worse outcomes in COVID‐19, the prognostic value of thalassaemic syndromes in COVID‐19 patients remains poorly understood. We studied the outcomes of 137 COVID‐19 patients with a history of transfusion‐dependent thalassaemia (TDT) and transfusion independent thalassaemia (TIT) extracted from a large international cohort and compared them with the outcomes from a matched cohort of COVID‐19 patients with no history of thalassaemia. The mean age of thalassaemia patients included in our study was 41 ± 16 years (48.9% male). Almost 81% of these patients suffered from TDT requiring blood transfusions on a regular basis. 38.7% of patients were blood group O. Cardiac iron overload was documented in 6.8% of study patients, whereas liver iron overload was documented in 35% of study patients. 40% of thalassaemia patients had a history of splenectomy. 27.7% of study patients required hospitalization due to COVID‐19 infection. Amongst the hospitalized patients, one patient died (0.7%) and one patient required intubation. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was required in almost 5% of study patients. After adjustment for age‐, sex‐ and other known risk factors (cardiac disease, kidney disease and pulmonary disease), the rate of in‐hospital complications (supplemental oxygen use, admission to an intensive care unit for CPAP therapy or intubation) and all‐cause mortality was significantly lower in the thalassaemia group compared to the matched cohort with no history of thalassaemia. Amongst thalassaemia patients in general, the TIT group exhibited a higher rate of hospitalization compared to the TDT group (p = 0.001). In addition, the rate of complications such as acute kidney injury and need for supplemental oxygen was significantly higher in the TIT group compared to the TDT group. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, age and history of heart or kidney disease were all found to be independent risk factors for increased in‐hospital, all‐cause mortality, whereas the presence of thalassaemia (either TDT or TIT) was found to be independently associated with reduced all‐cause mortality. The presence of thalassaemia in COVID‐19 patients was independently associated with lower in‐hospital, all‐cause mortality and few in‐hospital complications in our study. The pathophysiology of this is unclear and needs to be studied in vitro and in animal models.

Mitral valve disease, and in particular mitral regurgitation, is a common clinical entity. Until recently, surgical repair and replacement were the only therapeutic options available, leaving many patients untreated mostly due to excessive surgical risk. Over the last number of years, huge strides have been made regarding percutaneous, catheter-based solutions for mitral valve disease. Transcatheter repair procedures have most commonly been used, and in recent years there has been exponential growth in the number of devices available for transcatheter mitral valve replacement. Furthermore, the evolution of these devices has resulted in both smaller delivery systems and a shift towards transeptal access, negating the need for surgical incisions. In line with these advancements, and clinical trials demonstrating promising outcomes in carefully selected cases, recent guidelines have strengthened their recommendations for these devices. It is appropriate, therefore, to now review the current transcatheter repair and replacement devices available and the evidence for their use.