Although primarily affecting the respiratory system, COVID-19 causes multiple organ damage. One of its grave consequences is a prothrombotic state that manifests as thrombotic, microthrombotic and thromboembolic events. Therefore, understanding the effect of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy in the context of COVID-19 treatment is important. The aim of this rapid review was to highlight the role of thrombosis in COVID-19 and to provide new insights on the use of antithrombotic therapy in its management. A rapid systematic review was performed using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews. Papers published in English on antithrombotic agent use and COVID-19 complications were eligible. Results showed that the use of anticoagulants increased survival and reduced thromboembolic events in patients. However, despite the use of anticoagulants, patients still suffered thrombotic events likely due to heparin resistance. Data on antiplatelet use in combination with anticoagulants in the setting of COVID-19 are quite scarce. Current side effects of anticoagulation therapy emphasise the need to update treatment guidelines. In this rapid review, we address a possible modulatory role of antiplatelet and anticoagulant combination against COVID-19 pathogenesis. This combination may be an effective form of adjuvant therapy against COVID-19 infection. However, further studies are needed to elucidate potential risks and benefits associated with this combination.

BackgroundCOVID-19 is a respiratory disease that results in a prothrombotic state manifesting as thrombotic, microthrombotic and thromboembolic events. As a result, several antithrombotic modalities have been implicated in the treatment of this disease. This study aimed to identify if therapeutic anticoagulation (TAC) or concurrent use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants was associated with an improved outcome in this patient population.MethodsA retrospective observational cohort study of adult patients admitted to a single university hospital for COVID-19 infection was performed. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or the need for mechanical ventilation. The secondary outcomes were each of the components of the primary outcome, in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, or the need for mechanical ventilation.Results242 patients were included in the study and divided into four subgroups: Therapeutic anticoagulation (TAC), prophylactic anticoagulation+antiplatelet (PACAP), TAC+antiplatelet (TACAP) and prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) which was the reference for comparison. Multivariable Cox regression analysis and propensity matching were done and showed when compared with PAC, TACAP and TAC were associated with less in-hospital all-cause mortality with an adjusted HR (aHR) of 0.113 (95% CI 0.028 to 0.449) and 0.126 (95% CI 0.028 to 0.528), respectively. The number needed to treat in both subgroups was 11. Furthermore, PACAP was associated with a reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation with an aHR of 0.07 (95% CI 0.014 to 0.351). However, the was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of major or minor bleeds, ICU admission or the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality, ICU admission or the need for mechanical ventilation.ConclusionThe use of combined anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents or TAC alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was associated with a better outcome in comparison to PAC alone without an increase in the risk of major and minor bleeds. Sufficiently powered randomised controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining antiplatelet and anticoagulants agents or using TAC in the management of patients with COVID-19 infection.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is associated with endothelial dysfunction. Pharmacologically targeting the different mechanisms of endothelial dysfunction may improve clinical outcomes and lead to reduced morbidity and mortality. In this pilot, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, randomized clinical trial, we assigned patients who were admitted to the hospital with mild, moderate, or severe COVID‐19 infection to receive, on top of optimal medical therapy, either an endothelial protocol consisting of (Nicorandil, L‐arginine, folate, Nebivolol, and atorvastatin) or placebo for up to 14 days. The primary outcome was time to recovery, measured by an eight category ordinal scale and defined by the time to being discharged from the hospital or hospitalized for infection‐control or other nonmedical reasons. Secondary outcomes included the composite outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or the need for mechanical ventilation, all‐cause mortality, and the occurrence of side effects. Of 42 randomized patients, 37 were included in the primary analysis. The mean age of the patients was 57 years; the mean body mass index of study participants was 29.14. History of hypertension was present in 27% of the patients, obesity in 45%, and diabetes mellitus in 21.6%. The median (interquartile range) time to recovery was not significantly different between the endothelial protocol group (6 [4–12] days) and the placebo group (6 [5–8] days; p value = 0.854). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences in the need for mechanical ventilation or ICU admission, all‐cause mortality, or the occurrence of side effects between the endothelial protocol group and the placebo group. Among patients hospitalized with mild, moderate, or severe COVID‐19 infection, targeting endothelial dysfunction by administering Nicorandil, L‐arginine, Folate, Nebivolol, and Atorvastatin on top of optimal medical therapy did not decrease time to recovery. Based on this study’s findings, targeting endothelial dysfunction did not result in a clinically significant improvement in outcome and, as such, larger trials targeting this pathway are not recommended.

BackgroundAntidotes stocking is a critical component of hospital care for poisoned patients in emergency. Antidote stocking represents a major health challenge worldwide and in Lebanon. Systematic data monitoring of antidote stocking in Lebanese hospitals is lacking. The objective of this study is to assess the adequacy of antidotes stocking in Lebanese hospitals according to type and quantity and explore the characteristics associated with their differential availability.MethodsData collection to assess antidote availability and its correlate was undertaken through a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaires were distributed by the unit of surveillance at the Ministry of Public Health to eligible hospitals providing emergency care services. The list of essential antidotes was adapted from the World Health Organization (WHO) list and the British Columbia Drug and Poison Information Centre.ResultsAmong the 85 Lebanese hospitals surveyed none had in stock all the 35 essential antidotes required. The frequency of stocking by type of antidote varied from a minimum of 1.2 % of the hospitals having a (cyanide kit) to 100 % availability of (atropine and calcium gluconate). Teaching hospitals and those with a large bed-capacity reported a higher number of available antidotes for both immediate and non-immediate use than non-teaching hospitals while controlling for the hospital geographical region and public vs private sector.ConclusionThe Lebanese hospitals have a suboptimal stock of essential antidotes supply. It is recommended that the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health monitors closely on the hospital premises the adequacy and availability of essential antidotes stock.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40360-016-0092-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with endothelial dysfunction. Pharmacologically targeting the different mechanisms of endothelial dysfunction may improve clinical outcomes and lead to reduced morbidity and mortality Methods: In this pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial we assigned patients who were admitted to the hospital with mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 infection to receive, on top of optimal medical therapy, either an endothelial protocol consisting of (Nicorandil, L-arginine, Folate, Nebivolol, and Atorvastatin) or placebo for up to 14 days. The primary outcome was time to recovery, measured by an 8 category ordinal scale and defined by the time to being discharged from the hospital or hospitalized for infection-control or other nonmedical reasons. Secondary outcomes included the composite outcome of ICU admission or the need for mechanical ventilation, all-cause mortality, and the occurrence of side effects Results: Of 42 randomized patients, 37 were included in the primary analysis. The mean age of the patients was 57 years; the mean BMI of study participants was 29.14. History of hypertension was present in 27% of the patients, obesity in 45%, and Diabetes Mellitus in 21.6%. The median(Interquartile range) time to recovery was not significantly different between the endothelial protocol group (6 [4-12] days) and the placebo group (6 [5-8]days)(p-value = 0.854). Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences in the need for mechanical ventilation or ICU admission, all-cause mortality, and the occurrence of side effects between the endothelial protocol group and the placebo group. Conclusion: Among patients hospitalized with mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 infection, targeting endothelial dysfunction by administering Nicorandil, L-arginine, Folate, Nebivolol, and Atorvastatin on top of optimal medical therapy did not decrease time to recovery. However, this treatment protocol was associated with an excellent safety profile. Adequately sized prospective randomized controlled trials are needed for the evaluation of the role of treating endothelial dysfunction in COVID-19 infection.

Beta thalassemia is an inherited disorder resulting in abnormal or decreased production of hemoglobin, leading to hemolysis and chronic anemia. The long-term complications can affect multiple organ systems, namely the liver, heart, and endocrine. Myocardial iron overload is a common finding in β-thalassemia. As a result, different cardiovascular complications in the form of cardiomyopathy, pulmonary hypertension, arrhythmias, and vasculopathies can occur, and in extreme cases, sudden cardiac death. Each of these complications pertains to underlying etiologies and risk factors, which highlights the importance of early diagnosis and prevention. In this review, we will discuss different types of cardiovascular complications that can manifest in patients with β-thalassemia, in addition to the current diagnostic modalities, preventive and treatment modalities for these complications.

Severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is an undertreated common pathology associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Classically, surgical repair or valve replacement were the only therapeutic options and are associated with up to 10% postprocedural mortality. Transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions are a novel and effective therapeutic option for the treatment of significant TR. Several devices have been developed with different mechanisms of action. They are classified as annuloplasty devices, replacement devices, caval valve implantation and coaptation devices. In this review, we provide a step-by-step description of the procedural steps and techniques of every device along with video support.

Background COVID-19 is a respiratory disease that results in a prothrombotic state manifesting as thrombotic, microthrombotic and thromboembolic events. As a result, several antithrombotic modalities have been implicated in the treatment of this disease. Purpose Currently, prophylactic dose anticoagulation is considered the standard of care antithrombotic regimen in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. However, high-quality data about the subject is unavailable. This study aimed to identify if therapeutic anticoagulation (TAC) or concurrent use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants was associated with an improved outcome in this patient population. Methods A retrospective observational cohort study of adult patients admitted to a single university hospital for COVID-19 infection was performed. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or the need for mechanical ventilation. The secondary outcomes were each of the components of the primary outcome, in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, or the need for mechanical ventilation. Results 242 patients were included in the study and divided into four subgroups: Therapeutic anticoagulation (TAC), prophylactic anticoagulation+antiplatelet (PACAP), TAC+antiplatelet (TACAP) and prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) which was the reference for comparison. Multivariable Cox regression analysis and propensity matching were done and showed when compared with PAC, TACAP and TAC were associated with less in-hospital all-cause mortality with an adjusted HR (aHR) of 0.113 (95% CI 0.028 to 0.449) and 0.126 (95% CI 0.028 to 0.528), respectively. The number needed to treat in both subgroups was 11. Furthermore, PACAP was associated with a reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation with an aHR of 0.07 (95% CI 0.014 to 0.351). However, the was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of major or minor bleeds, ICU admission or the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality, ICU admission or the need for mechanical ventilation. Conclusion The use of combined anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents or TAC alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was associated with a better outcome in comparison to PAC alone without an increase in the risk of major and minor bleeds. Sufficiently powered randomised controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining antiplatelet and anticoagulants agents or using TAC in the management of patients with COVID-19 infection. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.