Objective Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several diagnostic prediction rules based on pretest probability and D-dimer have been validated in non-COVID patients, but it remains unclear if they can be safely applied in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the standard approach based on Wells and Geneva scores combined with a standard D-dimer cut-off of 500 ng/ml with three alternative strategies (age-adjusted, YEARS and PEGeD algorithms) in COVID-19 patients. Methods This retrospective study included all COVID-19 patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) due to PE suspicion. The diagnostic prediction rules for PE were compared between patients with and without PE. Results We included 300 patients and PE was confirmed in 15%. No differences were found regarding comorbidities, traditional risk factors for PE and signs and symptoms between patients with and without PE. Wells and Geneva scores showed no predictive value for PE occurrence, whether a standard or an age-adjusted cut-off was considered. YEARS and PEGeD algorithms were associated with increased specificity (19% CTPA reduction) but raising non-diagnosed PE. Despite elevated in all patients, those with PE had higher D-dimer levels. However, incrementing thresholds to select patients for CTPA was also associated with a substantial decrease in sensitivity. Conclusion None of the diagnostic prediction rules are reliable predictors of PE in COVID-19. Our data favour the use of a D-dimer threshold of 500 ng/ml, considering that higher thresholds increase specificity but limits this strategy as a screening test.
Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has rapidly expanded to a global pandemic, resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Even though predictors of infection remain unclear, age and preexisting cardiovascular conditions have been clearly identified as predictors of adverse outcomes and higher fatality rates. Since the virus infects host cells through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors, a key player in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, the interaction between the cardiovascular system and the progression of COVID-19 is nowadays a focus of huge interest. In this review, the authors analyze the available and very recent evidence on the risk factors and mechanisms of the most relevant cardiovascular complications associated with COVID-19, including acute cardiac injury, myocarditis, stress-cardiomyopathy, ischemic myocardial injury, cytokine release syndrome, thrombotic disease, cardiac arrhythmias, heart failure, and cardiogenic shock. Finally, we discuss the cardiovascular impact of the therapies under investigation for COVID-19 treatment.
Introduction: Risk factors comprising the CHA2DS2VASc score are recognized as risk factors for venous thromboembolism and mortality in COVID-19 patients. A modified CHA2DS2VASc score (M-CHA2D2VASc), developed by changing gender criteria from female to male, has been proposed to predict in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of M-CHA2D2VASc for adverse clinical outcomes and short-term mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to the Emergency Department.Material and Methods: Retrospective study of patients admitted to the ED who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography due to suspected pulmonary embolism or clinical worsening. Patients were stratified into three M-CHA2DS2-VASc risk-categories: low (0 - 1 points), intermediate (2 - 3 points) and high-risk (≥ 4 points).Results: We included 300 patients (median age 71 years, 59% male). The overall mortality was 27%. The M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was higher in non-survivors compared to survivors [4 (IQR:3 - 5) vs 2 (IQR: 1 - 4), respectively, p < 0.001). The M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was identified as an independent predictor of mortality in a multivariable logistic regression model (OR 1.406, p = 0.007). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that the M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was associated with short-term mortality (log-rank test < 0.001), regardless of hospitalization (log-rank test p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively). The survival proportion was 92%, 80% and 63% in the lower, intermediate, and higher risk-groups. As for the risk-categories, no difference was found in pulmonary embolism, Intensive Care Unit admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation.Discussion: This is the first study to validate M-CHA2DS2-VASc score as a predictor of short-term mortality in patients admitted to the Emergency Department.Conclusion: The M-CHA2DS2-VASC score might be useful for prompt risk-stratification in COVID-19 patients during admission to the Emergency Department.
Background: Falls are always a concern regarding the balance of risk/benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulants. In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients that had a fall/head injury reported in the RE-LY clinical trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy) and to explore the safety of dabigatran (a nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant). Methods: We performed a post hoc retrospective analysis of intracranial hemorrhage and major bleeding outcomes in the RE-LY trial with 18 113 individuals with atrial fibrillation, according to the status occurrence of falls (or head injury) reported as adverse events. Multivariate Cox regression models were used to provide adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. Results: In the study, 974 falls or head injury events were reported among 716 patients (4%). These patients were older and had more frequently comorbidities such as diabetes, previous stroke, or coronary artery disease. Patients with fall had a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.90–3.05]), intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.35–2.13]), and mortality (HR, 3.91 [95% CI, 2.51–6.10]) compared to those who did not have reported falls or head injury. Among patients who had falls, those allocated to dabigatran showed a lower intracranial hemorrhage risk (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18–0.98]) compared with warfarin. Conclusions: In this population, the risk of falls is important and confers a worse prognosis, increasing intracranial hemorrhage, and major bleeding. Patients who fell and were under dabigatran was associated with lower intracranial hemorrhage risk than those anticoagulated with warfarin, but the analysis was merely exploratory.
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.
hi@scite.ai
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.