Background: Previous reports have suggested that despite their dramatic presentation, patients with fulminant myocarditis (FM) might have better outcome than those with acute nonfulminant myocarditis (NFM). In this retrospective study, we report outcome and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in a large cohort of patients with FM compared with patients with NFM. Methods: The study population consists of 187 consecutive patients admitted between May 2001 and November 2016 with a diagnosis of acute myocarditis (onset of symptoms <1 month) of whom 55 required inotropes and/or mechanical circulatory support (FM) and the remaining 132 were hemodynamically stable (NFM). We also performed a subanalysis in 130 adult patients with acute viral myocarditis and viral prodrome within 2 weeks from the onset, which includes 34 with FM and 96 with NFM. Patients with giant-cell myocarditis, eosinophilic myocarditis, or cardiac sarcoidosis and those <15 years of age were excluded from the subanalysis. Results: In the whole population (n=187), the rate of in-hospital death or heart transplantation was 25.5% versus 0% in FM versus NFM, respectively ( P <0.0001). Long-term heart transplantation–free survival at 9 years was lower in FM than NFM (64.5% versus 100%, log-rank P <0.0001). Despite greater improvement in LVEF during hospitalization in FM versus NFM forms (median, 32% [interquartile range, 20%–40%] versus 3% [0%–10%], respectively; P <0.0001), the proportion of patients with LVEF <55% at last follow-up was higher in FM versus NFM (29% versus 9%; relative risk, 3.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.45–7.64, P =0.003). Similar results for survival and changes in LVEF in FM versus NFM were observed in the subgroup (n=130) with viral myocarditis. None of the patients with NFM and LVEF ≥55% at discharge had a significant decrease in LVEF at follow-up. Conclusions: Patients with FM have an increased mortality and need for heart transplantation compared with those with NFM. From a functional viewpoint, patients with FM have a more severely impaired LVEF at admission that, despite steep improvement during hospitalization, remains lower than that in patients with NFM at long-term follow-up. These findings also hold true when only the viral forms are considered and are different from previous studies showing better prognosis in FM.

Background: As the novel SARS-CoV-2 pandemic occurred, no specific treatment was yet available. Inflammatory response secondary to viral infection might be the driver of severe diseases. We report the safety and efficacy (in terms of overall survival and hospital discharge) of the anti-IL6 tocilizumab (TCZ) in subjects with COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective, single-center analysis included all the patients consecutively admitted to our Hospital with severe or critical COVID-19 who started TCZ treatment from March 13th to April 03rd, 2020. A 1:2 matching to patients not treated with TCZ was performed according to age, sex, severity of disease, P/F, Charlson Comorbidity Index and length of time between symptoms onset and hospital admittance. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests to compare the groups were applied. Kaplan Meier probability curves and Cox regression models for survival, hospital discharge and orotracheal intubation were used. Results: Seventy-four patients treated with TCZ were matched with 148 matched controls. They were mainly males (81.5%), Caucasian (82.0%) and with a median age of 59 years. The majority (69.8%) showed critical stage COVID-19 disease. TCZ use was associated with a better overall survival (HR 0.499 [95% CI 0.262-0.952], p = 0.035) compared to controls but with a longer hospital stay (HR 1.658 [95% CI 1.088-2.524], p = 0.019) mainly due to biochemical, respiratory and infectious adverse events. Discussion: TCZ use resulted potentially effective on COVID-19 in terms of overall survival. Caution is warranted given the potential occurrence of adverse events. Financial support: Some of the tocilizumab doses used in the subjects included in this analysis were provided by the "Multicenter study on the efficacy and tolerability of tocilizumab in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia" (EudraCT Number: 2020-001110-38) supported by the Italian National Agency for Drugs (AIFA). No specific funding support was planned for study design, data collection and analysis and manuscript writing of this paper.

Acute myocarditis (AM), a recent-onset inflammation of the heart, has heterogeneous clinical presentations, varying from minor symptoms to high-risk cardiac conditions with severe heart failure, refractory arrhythmias, and cardiogenic shock. AM is moving from being a definitive diagnosis based on histological evidence of inflammatory infiltrates on cardiac tissue to a working diagnosis supported by high sensitivity troponin increase in association with specific cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI) findings. Though experts still diverge between those advocating for histological definition versus those supporting a mainly clinical definition of myocarditis, in the real-world practice the diagnosis of AM has undoubtedly shifted from being mainly biopsy-based to solely CMRI-based in most of clinical scenarios. It is thus important to clearly define selected settings where EMB is a must, as information derived from histology is essential for an optimal management. As in other medical conditions, a risk-based approach should be promoted in order to identify the most severe AM cases requiring appropriate bundles of care, including early recognition, transfer to tertiary centers, aggressive circulatory supports with inotropes and mechanical devices, histologic confirmation and eventual immunosuppressive therapy. Despite improvements in recognition and treatment of AM, including a broader use of promising mechanical circulatory supports, severe forms of AM are still burdened by dismal outcomes. This review is focused on recent clinical studies and registries that shed new insights on AM. Attention will be paid to contemporary outcomes and predictors of prognosis, the emerging entity of immune checkpoint inhibitors-associated myocarditis, updated CMRI diagnostic criteria, new data on the use of temporary mechanical circulatory supports in fulminant myocarditis. The role of viruses as etiologic agents will be reviewed and a brief update on pediatric AM is also provided. Finally, we summarize a risk-based approach to AM, based on available evidence and clinical experience.

Background Tocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Methods A multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival. Results In the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6–24.0, P = 0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2–28.3, P < 0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Conclusions Tocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092).