Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which is characterized by a multitude of clinical abnormalities, including hypercoagulability. Although thrombosis is commonly observed in sepsis, the hypercoagulable state associated with COVID-19 is much more dramatic and may not be related to either the severity of the disease or the D-dimer levels. It may be due to a prothrombotic state induced by the disease itself. We report three cases of arterial thrombosis with a significant clot burden requiring urgent medical and surgical intervention. It is now a common practice to initiate anticoagulation for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis based on the D-dimer level in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, in our clinical experience, D-dimer levels did not correlate well with the clot burden or the risk for future thrombosis.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is blood pressure (BP) dependent, leading to the development of the BP-corrected metrics cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) and CAVI0. We aimed to assess risk prediction by heart-to-ankle PWV (haPWV), CAVI, and CAVI0 in a US population. METHODS We included 154 subjects (94.8% male; 47.7% African American) with and without heart failure (HF). Left and right haPWV, CAVI, and CAVI0 were measured with the VaSera 1500N device. We prospectively followed participants for a mean of 2.56 years for the composite endpoint death or HF-related hospital admission (DHFA). RESULTS Left and right haPWV, CAVI, and CAVI0 values did not differ significantly. In unadjusted analyses, haPWV (left standardized hazard ratio [HR] = 1.51, P = 0.007; right HR = 1.66, P = 0.003), CAVI (left HR = 1.45, P = 0.012; right HR = 1.58, P = 0.006), and CAVI0 (left HR = 1.39, P = 0.022; right HR = 1.44, P = 0.014) significantly predicted DHFA. Predictive ability showed a decreasing trend from haPWV to CAVI to CAVI0; in line with the increasing amount of BP correction in these metrics. In Cox models, right-sided metrics showed a trend toward stronger predictive ability than left-sided metrics. After adjustment for baseline HF status, the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) risk score, and systolic BP, right haPWV (HR = 1.58, P = 0.025) and CAVI (HR = 1.44, P = 0.044), but no other stiffness metrics, remained predictive. CONCLUSIONS Although conceptually attractive, BP-corrected arterial stiffness metrics do not offer better prediction of DHFA than conventional arterial stiffness metrics, nor do they predict DHFA independently of systolic BP. Our findings support PWV as the primary arterial stiffness metric for outcome prediction.