Background: Information regarding the cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 is scarce. We performed a systematic and comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Methods: 100 consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection underwent complete echocardiographic evaluation within 24 hours of admission and were compared to reference values. Echocardiographic studies included left ventricular (LV) systolic and diastolic function, valve hemodynamics and right ventricular (RV) assessment, as well as lung ultrasound. A second exam was performed in case of clinical deterioration. Results: Thirty two patients (32%) had a normal echocardiogram at baseline. The most common cardiac pathology was RV dilatation and dysfunction (observed in 39% of patients), followed by LV diastolic dysfunction (16%) and LV systolic dysfunction (10%). Patients with elevated troponin (20%) or worse clinical condition did not demonstrate any significant difference in LV systolic function compared to patients with normal troponin or better clinical condition, but had worse RV function. Clinical deterioration occurred in 20% of patients. In these patients, the most common echocardiographic abnormality at follow-up was RV function deterioration (12 patients), followed by LV systolic and diastolic deterioration (in 5 patients). Femoral vein thrombosis (DVT) was diagnosed in 5 of 12 patients with RV failure. Conclusions: In COVID-19 infection, LV systolic function is preserved in the majority of patients, but LV diastolic and RV function are impaired. Elevated troponin and poorer clinical grade are associated with worse RV function. In patients presenting with clinical deterioration at follow-up, acute RV dysfunction, with or without DVT, is more common, but acute LV systolic dysfunction was noted in ≈20%.

Information regarding the use of lung ultrasound (LUS) in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is quickly accumulating, but its use for risk stratification and outcome prediction has yet to be described. We performed the first systematic and comprehensive LUS evaluation of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, in order to describe LUS findings and their association with clinical course and outcome. Methods: Between 21/03/2020 and 04/05/2020, 120 consecutive patients admitted to the Tel Aviv Medical Center due to COVID-19, underwent complete LUS within 24 h of admission. A second exam was performed in case of clinical deterioration. LUS score of 0 (best)-36 (worst) was assigned to each patient. LUS findings were compared with clinical data. Results: The median baseline total LUS score was 15, IQR [7-20]. Baseline LUS score was 0-18 in 80 (67%) patients, and 19-36 in 40 (33%) patients. The majority had patchy pleural thickening (n = 100; 83%), or patchy subpleural consolidations (n = 93; 78%) in at least one zone. The prevalence of pleural thickening, subpleural consolidations and the total LUS score were all correlated with severity of illness on admission. Clinical deterioration was associated with increased follow-up LUS scores (p = 0.0009), mostly due to loss of aeration in anterior lung segments. The optimal cutoff point for LUS score was 18 (sensitivity = 62%, specificity = 74%). Both mortality and need for invasive mechanical ventilation were increased with baseline LUS score > 18 compared to baseline LUS score 0-18. Unadjusted hazard ratio of death for LUS score was 1.08 per point [1.02-1.16], p = 0.008; Unadjusted hazard ratio of the composite endpoint (death or need for invasive mechanical ventilation) for LUS score was 1.12 per point [1.05-1.2], p = 0.0008. Conclusion: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19, at all clinical grades, present with pathological LUS findings. Baseline LUS score strongly correlates with the eventual need for invasive mechanical ventilation and is a strong predictor of mortality. Routine use of LUS may guide patients' management strategies, as well as resource allocation in case of surge capacity.

Background Large number of patients around the world are recovering from COVID-19; many of them report persistence of symptoms. Objectives We sought to test pulmonary, cardiovascular and peripheral responses to exercise in patients recovering from COVID-19. Methods We prospectively evaluated patients who recovered from COVID-19 using a combined anatomic/functional assessment. All patients underwent clinical examination, laboratory tests, and a combined stress echocardiography and cardiopulmonary exercise test. We measured left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction, stroke volume, heart rate, E/e' ratio, right ventricular function, VO 2 , lung volumes, Ventilatory efficiency, O 2 saturation and muscle O 2 extraction in all effort stages and compared them to historical controls. Results A total of 71 patients were assessed 90.6±26 days after onset of COVID-19 symptoms. Only 23 (33%) were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were fatigue (34%), muscle weakness/pain (27%) and dyspnea (22%). VO 2 was lower among post-COVID-19 patients compared to controls (p=0.03, group by time interaction p=0.007). Reduction in peak VO 2 was due to a combination of chronotropic incompetence (75% of post-COVID-19 patients vs. 8% of controls, p<0.0001) and insufficient increase in stroke volume during exercise (p=0.0007, group by time interaction p=0.03). Stroke volume limitation was mostly explained by diminished increase in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (p=0.1, group by time interaction p=0.03) and insufficient increase in ejection fraction (p=0.01, group by time interaction p=0.01). Post-COVID-19 patients had higher peripheral O 2 extraction (p=0.004) and did not have significantly different respiratory and gas exchange parameters compared to controls. Conclusions Patients recovering from COVID-19 have symptoms associated with objective reduction in peak VO 2 . The mechanism of this reduction is complex and mainly involves a combination of attenuated heart rate and stroke volume reserve.

No abstract

Aims We aim to assess changes in routine echocardiographic and longitudinal strain parameters in patients recovering from Coronavirus disease 2019 during hospitalization and at 3-month follow-up. Methods and results Routine comprehensive echocardiography and STE of both ventricles were performed during hospitalization for acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection as part of a prospective pre-designed protocol and compared with echocardiography performed ∼3 months after recovery in 80 patients, using a similar protocol. Significantly improved right ventricle (RV) fractional area change, longer pulmonary acceleration time, lower right atrial pressure, and smaller RV end-diastolic and end-systolic area were observed at the recovery assessment (P &lt; 0.05 for all). RV global longitudinal strain improved at the follow-up evaluation (23.2 ± 5 vs. 21.7 ± 4, P = 0.03), mostly due to improvement in septal segments. Only eight (10%) patients recovering from COVID-19 infection had abnormal ejection fraction (EF) at follow-up. However, LV related routine (E, E/e′, stroke volume, LV size), or STE parameters did not change significantly from the assessment during hospitalization. A significant proportion [36 (45%)] of patients had some deterioration of longitudinal strain at follow-up, and 20 patients (25%) still had abnormal LV STE ∼3 months after COVID-19 acute infection. Conclusion In patients previously discharged from hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection, RV routine echocardiographic and RV STE parameters improve significantly concurrently with improved RV haemodynamics. In contrast, a quarter of patients still have LV systolic dysfunction based on STE cut-offs. Moreover, LV STE does not improve significantly, implying subclinical LV dysfunction may be part and parcel of recovering from COVID-19 infection.

Background and Objectives We aimed to evaluate sonographic features that may aid in risk stratification and propose a focused cardiac and lung ultrasound (LUS) algorithm in patients with COVID-19 Methods Two hundred consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 underwent comprehensive clinical and echocardiographic examination, as well as LUS, irrespective of clinical indication, within 24 hours of admission as part of a prospective predefined protocol. Assessment included calculation of the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), left ventricular (LV) systolic and diastolic function, hemodynamic and right ventricular (RV) assessment and a calculated LUS score. We performed outcome analysis to identify echocardiographic and LUS predictors of mortality or the composite event of mortality or need for invasive mechanical ventilation, and to assess their adjunctive value on top of clinical parameters and MEWS. Results A simplified echocardiographic risk score comprised of LV ejection fraction< 50% combined with TAPSE< 18 mm, was associated with mortality (p=0.0002) and with the composite event (p=0.0001). Stepwise analyses evaluating echocardiographic and LUS parameters on top of existing clinical risk scores showed that addition of TAPSE and SVI improved prediction of mortality when added to clinical variables but not when added to MEWS. Once echocardiography was added, and patients re-categorized as high risk only if having both high risk MEWS, and high-risk cardiac features, the specificity increased from 63% to 87%, positive predictive value from 28% to 48% and accuracy improved from 66% to 85%. Although LUS was not associated with incremental risk prediction for mortality above clinical and echocardiographic criteria, it improved prediction of need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Conclusions In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, a very limited echocardiographic exam is sufficient for outcome prediction. The addition of echocardiography in patients with high risk MEWS score decreases the rate of falsely identifying patients as high risk to die, and may improve resource allocation in case of high patient load.background

Aims Cardiovascular involvement is common in COVID-19. We sought to describe the haemodynamic profiles of hospitalized COVID-19 patients and determine their association with mortality. Methods and results Consecutive hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection underwent clinical evaluation using the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and a full non-invasive echocardiographic haemodynamic evaluation, irrespective of clinical indication, as part of a prospective predefined protocol. Patients were stratified based on filling pressure and output into four groups. Multivariable Cox-Hazard analyses determined the association between haemodynamic parameters with mortality. Among 531 consecutive patients, 44% of patients had normal left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) haemodynamic status. In contrast to LV haemodynamic parameters, RV parameters worsened with higher MEWS stage. While RV parameters did not have incremental risk prediction value above MEWS, LV stroke volume index, E/e′ ratio, and LV stroke work index were all independent predictors of outcome, particularly in severe disease. Patients with LV or RV with high filling pressure and low output had the worse outcome, and patients with normal haemodynamics had the best (P &lt; 0.0001). Conclusion In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, almost half have normal left and right haemodynamics at presentation. RV but not LV haemodynamics are related to easily obtainable clinical parameters. LV but not RV haemodynamics are independent predictors of mortality, mostly in patients with severe disease.

CRPv might be an independent and rapidly measurable biomarker for short-term mortality in patients presenting with STEMI.