In African patients, AHF has a predominantly nonischemic cause, most commonly hypertension. The condition occurs in middle-aged adults, equally in men and women, and is associated with high mortality. The outcome is similar to that observed in non-African AHF registries, suggesting that AHF has a dire prognosis globally, regardless of the cause.
AimsContrary to elderly patients with ischaemic-related acute heart failure (AHF) typically enrolled in North American and European registries, patients enrolled in the sub-Saharan Africa Survey of Heart Failure (THESUS-HF) were middle-aged with AHF due primarily to non-ischaemic causes. We sought to describe factors prognostic of re-admission and death in this developing population. Methods and resultsPrognostic models were developed from data collected on 1006 patients enrolled in THESUS-HF, a prospective registry of AHF patients in 12 hospitals in nine sub-Saharan African countries, mostly in Nigeria, Uganda, and South Africa. The main predictors of 60-day re-admission or death in a model excluding the geographic region were a history of malignancy and severe lung disease, admission systolic blood pressure, heart rate and signs of congestion (rales), kidney function (BUN), and echocardiographic ejection fraction. In a model including region, the Southern region had a higher risk. Age and admission sodium levels were not prognostic. Predictors of 180-day mortality included malignancy, severe lung disease, smoking history, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and symptoms and signs of congestion (orthopnoea, peripheral oedema and rales) at admission, kidney dysfunction (BUN), anaemia, and HIV positivity. Discrimination was low for all models, similar to models for European and North American patients, suggesting that the main factors contributing to adverse outcomes are still unknown. ConclusionDespite the differences in age and disease characteristics, the main predictors for 6 months mortality and combined 60 days re-admission and death are largely similar in sub-Saharan Africa as in the rest of the world, with some exceptions such as the association of the HIV status with mortality.--
OBJECTIVES The objective was to compare COVID‐19 outcomes in the Omicron‐driven fourth wave with prior waves in the Western Cape, assess the contribution of undiagnosed prior infection to differences in outcomes in a context of high seroprevalence due to prior infection and determine whether protection against severe disease conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination was maintained. METHODS In this cohort study, we included public sector patients aged ≥20 years with a laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 diagnosis between 14 November and 11 December 2021 (wave four) and equivalent prior wave periods. We compared the risk between waves of the following outcomes using Cox regression: death, severe hospitalisation or death and any hospitalisation or death (all ≤14 days after diagnosis) adjusted for age, sex, comorbidities, geography, vaccination and prior infection. RESULTS We included 5144 patients from wave four and 11,609 from prior waves. The risk of all outcomes was lower in wave four compared to the Delta‐driven wave three (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for death 0.27 [0.19; 0.38]. Risk reduction was lower when adjusting for vaccination and prior diagnosed infection (aHR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.29; 0.59) and reduced further when accounting for unascertained prior infections (aHR: 0.72). Vaccine protection was maintained in wave four (aHR for outcome of death: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.10; 0.58). CONCLUSIONS In the Omicron‐driven wave, severe COVID‐19 outcomes were reduced mostly due to protection conferred by prior infection and/or vaccination, but intrinsically reduced virulence may account for a modest reduction in risk of severe hospitalisation or death compared to the Delta‐driven wave.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.