Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has affected over 30 million globally to date. Although high rates of venous thromboembolism and evidence of COVID-19-induced endothelial dysfunction have been reported, the precise aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 infection remains to be fully elucidated. Therefore, we assessed clinical platelet parameters and circulating platelet activity in patients with severe and nonsevere COVID-19. An assessment of clinical blood parameters in patients with severe COVID-19 disease (requiring intensive care), patients with nonsevere disease (not requiring intensive care), general medical in-patients without COVID-19, and healthy donors was undertaken. Platelet function and activity were also assessed by secretion and specific marker analysis. We demonstrated that routine clinical blood parameters including increased mean platelet volume (MPV) and decreased platelet:neutrophil ratio are associated with disease severity in COVID-19 upon hospitalisation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Strikingly, agonist-induced ADP release was 30- to 90-fold higher in COVID-19 patients compared with hospitalised controls and circulating levels of platelet factor 4 (PF4), soluble P-selectin (sP-selectin), and thrombopoietin (TPO) were also significantly elevated in COVID-19. This study shows that distinct differences exist in routine full blood count and other clinical laboratory parameters between patients with severe and nonsevere COVID-19. Moreover, we have determined all COVID-19 patients possess hyperactive circulating platelets. These data suggest abnormal platelet reactivity may contribute to hypercoagulability in COVID-19 and confirms the role that platelets/clotting has in determining the severity of the disease and the complexity of the recovery path.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has to date affected over 13.3 million globally. Although high rates of venous thromboembolism and evidence of COVID-19-induced endothelial dysfunction have been reported, the precise aetiology of the increased thrombotic risk associated with COVID-19 infection remains to be fully elucidated. Objectives Here, we assessed clinical platelet parameters and circulating platelet activity in patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19. Methods An assessment of clinical blood parameters in patients with severe COVID-19 disease (requiring intensive care), patients with non-severe disease (not requiring intensive care), general medical in-patients without COVID-19 and healthy donors was undertaken. Platelet function and activity were also assessed by secretion and specific marker analysis. Results We show that routine clinical blood parameters including increased MPV and decreased platelet:neutrophil ratio are associated with disease severity in COVID-19 upon hospitalisation and intensive care unit admission. Strikingly, agonist-induced ADP release was dramatically higher in COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID-19 hospitalized patients and circulating levels of PF4, sP-selectin and TPO were also significantly elevated in COVID-19. Conclusion Distinct differences exist in routine full blood count and other clinical laboratory parameters between patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19. Moreover, we have determined that COVID-19 patients possess hyperactive circulating platelets. These data suggest that abnormal platelet reactivity may contribute to hypercoagulability in COVID-19. Further investigation of platelet function in COVID-19 may provide additional insights into the aetiology of thrombotic risk in this disease and may contribute to the optimisation of thrombosis prevention and treatment strategies.

ObjectivesHomeless people lack a secure, stable place to live and experience higher rates of serious illness than the housed population. Studies, mainly from the USA, have reported increased use of unscheduled healthcare by homeless individuals.We sought to compare the use of unscheduled emergency department (ED) and inpatient care between housed and homeless hospital patients in a high-income European setting in Dublin, Ireland.SettingA large university teaching hospital serving the south inner city in Dublin, Ireland. Patient data are collected on an electronic patient record within the hospital.ParticipantsWe carried out an observational cross-sectional study using data on all ED visits (n=47 174) and all unscheduled admissions under the general medical take (n=7031) in 2015.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe address field of the hospital’s electronic patient record was used to identify patients living in emergency accommodation or rough sleeping (hereafter referred to as homeless). Data on demographic details, length of stay and diagnoses were extracted.ResultsIn comparison with housed individuals in the hospital catchment area, homeless individuals had higher rates of ED attendance (0.16 attendances per person/annum vs 3.0 attendances per person/annum, respectively) and inpatient bed days (0.3 vs 4.4 bed days/person/annum). The rate of leaving ED before assessment was higher in homeless individuals (40% of ED attendances vs 15% of ED attendances in housed individuals). The mean age of homeless medical inpatients was 44.19 years (95% CI 42.98 to 45.40), whereas that of housed patients was 61.20 years (95% CI 60.72 to 61.68). Homeless patients were more likely to terminate an inpatient admission against medical advice (15% of admissions vs 2% of admissions in homeless individuals).ConclusionHomeless patients represent a significant proportion of ED attendees and medical inpatients. In contrast to housed patients, the bulk of usage of unscheduled care by homeless people occurs in individuals aged 25–65 years.

Background: Hypercoagulability and endothelial dysfunction are hallmarks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and appear to predict disease severity. A high incidence of thrombosis despite thromboprophylaxis is reported in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Recent randomized clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-intensity heparin confers a survival benefit in moderate-severity COVID-19 compared to standard-intensity heparin, potentially by harnessing heparin-mediated endothelialstabilizing and anti-inflammatory effects. Objective: We hypothesized that patients with moderate-severity COVID-19 exhibit enhanced hypercoagulability despite standard-intensity thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) compared to non-COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Methods: Patients with moderate COVID-19 and a control group (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-negative hospitalized patients) receiving LMWH thromboprophylaxis were recruited. Markers of endothelial damage and plasma thrombin generation parameters were assessed. Results: Tissue plasminogen activator levels were significantly increased in the COVID-19 group (8.3 ± 4.4 vs. 4.9 ± 2.4 ng/ml; P = .02) compared to non-COVID-19-hospitalized patients. Despite thromboprophylaxis, mean endogenous thrombin potential was significantly increased among COVID-19 patients (1929 ± 448 vs. 1528 ± 460.8 nM*min; P = .04) but lag time to thrombin generation was significantly | 1009 KELLIHER Et aL.

To date, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected over 100 million people globally. COVID-19 can present with a variety of different symptoms leading to manifestation of disease ranging from mild cases to a life-threatening condition requiring critical care-level support. At present, a rapid prediction of disease severity and critical care requirement in COVID-19 patients, in early stages of disease, remains an unmet challenge. Therefore, we assessed whether parameters from a routine clinical hematology workup, at the time of hospital admission, can be valuable predictors of COVID-19 severity and the requirement for critical care. Hematological data from the day of hospital admission (day of positive COVID-19 test) for patients with severe COVID-19 disease (requiring critical care during illness) and patients with non-severe disease (not requiring critical care) were acquired. The data were amalgamated and cleaned and modeling was performed. Using a decision tree model, we demonstrated that routine clinical hematology parameters are important predictors of COVID-19 severity. This proof-of-concept study shows that a combination of activated partial thromboplastin time, white cell count-to-neutrophil ratio, and platelet count can predict subsequent severity of COVID-19 with high sensitivity and specificity (area under ROC 0.9956) at the time of the patient's hospital admission. These data, pending further validation, indicate that a decision tree model with hematological parameters could potentially form the basis for a rapid risk stratification tool that predicts COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare disease of the pulmonary vasculature, characterised pathologically by proliferation, remodelling and thrombosis in situ. Unfortunately, existing therapeutic interventions do not reverse these findings and the disease continues to result in significant morbidity and premature mortality. A number of haematological derangements have been described in PAH which may provide insights into the pathobiology of the disease and also provide opportunities to target new therapeutic pathways. These include quantitative and qualitative platelet abnormalities, such as thrombocytopaenia, increased mean platelet volume (MPV) and altered platelet bioenergetics. Furthermore, a hypercoagulable state and aberrant negative regulatory pathways can be observed, which could contribute to thrombosis in situ in distal pulmonary arteries and arterioles. Finally, there is increasing interest in the role of extracellular vesicle (EV) autocrine and paracrine signalling in PAH, and their potential utility as biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets. This review focuses on the potential role of platelets, EVs and coagulation pathways in the pathobiology of PAH. We highlight important unanswered clinical questions and the implications of these observations for future research and PAH directed therapies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has devastated the global community and continues to cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The development of effective vaccines has represented a major step towards reducing transmission and illness severity but significant challenges remain, particularly in regions where vaccine access has been limited. COVID-19 is associated with hypercoagulability and increased risk of thrombosis, with greatest risk among the critically ill. Interestingly, early observational data suggested that anticoagulant therapy might improve clinical outcomes, aside from thrombotic events, in patients with COVID-19. In this review we summarise data generated from three published randomised clinical trials which have sought to determine the effect of therapeutic heparin anticoagulation on efficacy and safety outcomes in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: the multiplatform REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a and ATTACC randomised controlled trials and the RAPID trial. In the multiplatform REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a and ATTACC randomised controlled trials, therapeutic heparin was not associated with benefit in critically ill patients with COVID-19 compared with usual care (adjusted proportional odds ratio (OR) for increased organ-support free days up to day 21: 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67–1.03, posterior probability of futility 99.9%). Conversely, among hospitalised patients without critical illness, therapeutic heparin was associated with an increased probability of organ support-free days alive (adjusted OR, 1.27; 95% credible interval, 1.03–1.58). The RAPID trial also evaluated the effect of therapeutic heparin compared with prophylactic heparin in non-critically ill patients. In this study, therapeutic heparin did not significantly reduce the odds of the primary composite outcome (death, mechanical ventilation or intensive care unit admission) (OR 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 1.10; p = 0.12) but was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality [OR, 0.22 (95%-CI, 0.07 to 0.65)]. Collectively these studies suggest that therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin may reduce the severity of illness and potentially even confer a survival benefit in hospitalised, non-critically ill patients with COVID-19. No benefit for therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin was evident in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Therefore, while the results of additional studies in this evolving field are pending, it is important to approach decisions regarding therapeutic heparin in moderately ill hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in a measured and individualised manner.

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a rare and under-recognized complication of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Information regarding the characteristics of CTEPH in Ireland is limited and the aim of this retrospective cohort study was to address this knowledge gap. Seventy-two cases of CTEPH were diagnosed in the National Pulmonary Hypertension Unit (NPHU) in Ireland between 2010 and 2020. This accounted for 6% of all referrals to the unit and translates to an estimated annual incidence of 1.39 per million population (95% confidence interval, 0.33-2.46). The prevalence of diagnosed CTEPH in Ireland in 2020 was estimated at 12.05 per million population (95% CI 9.00-15.10). The average duration of symptoms prior to CTEPH diagnosis was 23 (± 22) months. Patients with CTEPH were more likely to be male (n=40, 56%), older (60 ± 17 years) and have identifiable risk factors for CTEPH (n=61, 85%) at diagnosis. Regarding treatment, pulmonary hypertension (PH) vasodilator therapy was prescribed in 75% (n=54) within 12 months of diagnosis, inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were placed in 24% (n=17) and 97% (n=70) of cases were anticoagulated . Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) was performed in 35% (n=25), balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) in 6% (n=4). One-, three- and five-year survival was 93%, 80% and 65% from the time of diagnosis, and this was significantly better in patients who underwent PEA (p=0.01). This is the first study describing the characteristics of CTEPH in Ireland and highlights suboptimal disease recognition and referral for assessment for PEA.