Medtronic.

IMPORTANCE Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has evolved into a global pandemic. Low-dose colchicine combines anti-inflammatory action with a favorable safety profile. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of treatment with colchicine on cardiac and inflammatory biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial (the Greek Study in the Effects of Colchicine in COVID-19 Complications Prevention), 105 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized in a 1:1 allocation from April 3 to April 27, 2020, to either standard medical treatment or colchicine with standard medical treatment. The study took place in 16 tertiary hospitals in Greece. INTERVENTION Colchicine administration (1.5-mg loading dose followed by 0.5 mg after 60 min and maintenance doses of 0.5 mg twice daily) with standard medical treatment for as long as 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary end points were (1) maximum high-sensitivity cardiac troponin level; (2) time for C-reactive protein to reach more than 3 times the upper reference limit; and (3) time to deterioration by 2 points on a 7-grade clinical status scale, ranging from able to resume normal activities to death. Secondary end points were (1) the percentage of participants requiring mechanical ventilation, (2) all-cause mortality, and (3) number, type, severity, and seriousness of adverse events. The primary efficacy analysis was performed on an intentionto-treat basis. RESULTS A total of 105 patients were evaluated (61 [58.1%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 64 [54-76] years) with 50 (47.6%) randomized to the control group and 55 (52.4%) to the colchicine group. Median (interquartile range) peak high-sensitivity cardiac troponin values were 0.0112 (0.0043-0.0093) ng/mL in the control group and 0.008 (0.004-0.0135) ng/mL in the colchicine group (P = .34). Median (interquartile range) maximum C-reactive protein levels were 4.5 (1.4-8.9) mg/dL vs 3.1 (0.8-9.8) mg/dL (P = .73), respectively. The clinical primary end point rate was 14.0% in (continued) Key Points Question Is the receipt of colchicine among patients hospitalized with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 associated with clinical benefit? Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 105 patients, the rate of the primary clinical end point (clinical deterioration) was higher in the control group than in the colchicine group, and the time to clinical deterioration was shorter in the control group than in the colchicine arm. No difference was observed in the primary biochemical end point (highsensitivity troponin concentration), but patients in the colchicine group had a smaller increase in dimerized plasma fragment D compared with patients in the control group. Meaning The hypothesis-generating findings of this study suggest a role for colchicine in the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

No abstract

Aims To provide contemporary data on the implementation of European guideline recommendations for lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) across different settings and populations and how this impacts low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement. Methods and results An 18 country, cross-sectional, observational study of patients prescribed LLT for primary or secondary prevention in primary or secondary care across Europe. Between June 2017 and November 2018, data were collected at a single visit, including LLT in the preceding 12 months and most recent LDL-C. Primary outcome was the achievement of risk-based 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C goal while receiving stabilized LLT; 2019 goal achievement was also assessed. Overall, 5888 patients (3000 primary and 2888 secondary prevention patients) were enrolled; 54% [95% confidence interval (CI) 52–56] achieved their risk-based 2016 goal and 33% (95% CI 32–35) achieved their risk-based 2019 goal. High-intensity statin monotherapy was used in 20% and 38% of very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Corresponding 2016 goal attainment was 22% and 45% (17% and 22% for 2019 goals) for very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Use of moderate–high-intensity statins in combination with ezetimibe (9%), or any LLT with PCSK9 inhibitors (1%), was low; corresponding 2016 and 2019 goal attainment was 53% and 20% (ezetimibe combination), and 67% and 58% (PCSK9i combination). Conclusion Gaps between clinical guidelines and clinical practice for lipid management across Europe persist, which will be exacerbated by the 2019 guidelines. Even with optimized statins, greater utilization of non-statin LLT is likely needed to reduce these gaps for patients at highest risk.

Ventricular–arterial coupling (VAC) plays a major role in the physiology of cardiac and aortic mechanics, as well as in the pathophysiology of cardiac disease. VAC assessment possesses independent diagnostic and prognostic value and may be used to refine riskstratification and monitor therapeutic interventions. Traditionally, VAC is assessed by the non‐invasive measurement of the ratio of arterial (Ea) to ventricular end‐systolic elastance (Ees). With disease progression, both Ea and Ees may become abnormal and the Ea/Ees ratio may approximate its normal values. Therefore, the measurement of each component of this ratio or of novel more sensitive markers of myocardial (e.g. global longitudinal strain) and arterial function (e.g. pulse wave velocity) may better characterize VAC. In valvular heart disease, systemic arterial compliance and valvulo–arterial impedance have an established diagnostic and prognostic value and may monitor the effects of valve replacement on vascular and cardiac function. Treatment guided to improve VAC through improvement of both or each one of its components may delay incidence of heart failure and possibly improve prognosis in heart failure. In this consensus document, we describe the pathophysiology, the methods of assessment as well as the clinical implications of VAC in cardiac diseases and heart failure. Finally, we focus on interventions that may improve VAC and thus modify prognosis.

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01936285.

Adiponectin is an adipokine whose biosynthesis is deranged in obesity and diabetes mellitus, predisposing to atherosclerosis. Evidence suggests that adiponectin has anti-atherogenic properties by improving endothelial function and having anti-inflammatory effects in the vascular wall. In addition, adiponectin modifies vascular intracellular redox signalling and exerts indirect antioxidant effects on human myocardium. However, its clinical role in cardiovascular disease is obscure. Adiponectin's positive prognostic value in coronary artery disease had been widely supported over the last years, but this view has been questioned recently. High adiponectin levels are paradoxically associated with poorer prognosis in heart failure syndrome. These controversial findings seem surprising as adiponectin has been viewed overall as an anti-atherogenic molecule. Therefore, any certain conclusion about adiponectin's role in cardiovascular disease seems premature. Despite the rapidly accumulating literature on this adipokine, it is still unclear whether adiponectin is a key mediator or a bystander in cardiovascular disease. It is still uncertain whether adiponectin levels have any clinical significance for risk stratification in cardiovascular disease or they just reflect the activation of complex and opposing underlying mechanisms. Circulating adiponectin levels should be interpreted with caution, as they may have completely different prognostic value, depending on the underlying disease state.

No abstract