scholarly journals Multiple Approaches at Admission Based on Lung Ultrasound and Biomarkers Improves Risk Identification in COVID-19 Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (23) ◽  
pp. 5478
Author(s):  
Jorge Rubio-Gracia ◽  
Marta Sánchez-Marteles ◽  
Vanesa Garcés-Horna ◽  
Luis Martínez-Lostao ◽  
Fernando Ruiz-Laiglesia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Risk Identification ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Predictive Capacity ◽  
Improve Risk Stratification ◽  
Clinical Models ◽  
The Right

Background: Risk stratification of COVID-19 patients is fundamental to improving prognosis and selecting the right treatment. We hypothesized that a combination of lung ultrasound (LUZ-score), biomarkers (sST2), and clinical models (PANDEMYC score) could be useful to improve risk stratification. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study designed to analyze the prognostic value of lung ultrasound, sST2, and PANDEMYC score in COVID-19 patients. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death and/or admission to the intensive care unit. The total length of hospital stay, increase of oxygen flow, or escalated medical treatment during the first 72 h were secondary endpoints. Results: a total of 144 patients were included; the mean age was 57.5 ± 12.78 years. The median PANDEMYC score was 243 (52), the median LUZ-score was 21 (10), and the median sST2 was 53.1 ng/mL (30.9). Soluble ST2 showed the best predictive capacity for the primary endpoint (AUC = 0.764 (0.658–0.871); p = 0.001), towards the PANDEMYC score (AUC = 0.762 (0.655–0.870); p = 0.001) and LUZ-score (AUC = 0.749 (0.596–0.901); p = 0.002). Taken together, these three tools significantly improved the risk capacity (AUC = 0.840 (0.727–0.953); p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: The PANDEMYC score, lung ultrasound, and sST2 concentrations upon admission for COVID-19 are independent predictors of intra-hospital death and/or the need for admission to the ICU for mechanical ventilation. The combination of these predictive tools improves the predictive power compared to each one separately. The use of decision trees, based on multivariate models, could be useful in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Point-of-care lung ultrasound assessment for risk stratification and therapy guiding in COVID-19 patients. A prospective non-interventional study

2021 ◽  
pp. 2004283
Author(s):  
Jorge Rubio-Gracia ◽  
Ignacio Giménez-López ◽  
Vanesa Garcés-Horna ◽  
Daniel López-Delgado ◽  
Jose Luis Sierra-Monzón ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Injury ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Point Of Care Ultrasound ◽  
Hospitalised Patients

BackgroundLung ultrasound (LUS) is feasible for assessing lung injury caused by COVID-19. However, the prognostic meaning and time-line changes of lung injury assessed by LUS in COVID-19 hospitalised patients, is unknown.MethodsProspective cohort study designed to analyse prognostic value of LUS in COVID-19 patients by using a quantitative scale (LUZ-score) during the first 72 h after admission. Primary endpoint was in-hospital death and/or admission to the intensive care unit. Total length of hospital stay, increase of oxygen flow or escalate medical treatment during the first 72 h, were secondary endpoints.Results130 patients were included in the final analysis; mean age was 56.7±13.5 years. Time since the beginning of symptoms until admission was 6 days (4–9). Lung injury assessed by LUZ-score did not differ during the first 72 h (21 points [16–26] at admission versus 20 points [16–27] at 72 h; p=0.183). In univariable logistic regression analysis estimated PaO2/FiO2 (HR 0.99 [0.98–0.99]; p=0.027) and LUZ-score>22 points (5.45 (1.42–20.90); p=0.013) were predictors for the primary endpoint.ConclusionsLUZ-score is an easy, simple and fast point of care ultrasound tool to identify patients with severe lung injury due to COVID-19, upon admission. Baseline score is predictive of severity along the whole period of hospitalisation. The score facilitates early implementation or intensification of treatment for COVID-19 infection. LUZ-score may be combined with clinical variables (as estimated PAFI) to further refine risk stratification.

Risk stratification in hf with mid-range LVEF: the role of cardiopulmonary exercise testing

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
B.M.L Rocha ◽  
G.J Lopes Da Cunha ◽  
P.M.D Lopes ◽  
P.N Freitas ◽  
F Gama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Exercise Testing ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardiopulmonary Exercise

Abstract Background Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is recommended in the evaluation of selected patients with Heart Failure (HF). Notwithstanding, its prognostic significance has mainly been ascertained in those with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40% (i.e., HFrEF). The main goal of our study was to assess the role of CPET in risk stratification of HF with mid-range (40–49%) LVEF (i.e., HFmrEF) compared to HFrEF. Methods We conducted a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients with HF and LVEF <50% who underwent CPET from 2003–2018. The primary composite endpoint of death, heart transplant or HF hospitalization was assessed. Results Overall, 404 HF patients (mean age 57±11 years, 78.2% male, 55.4% ischemic HF) were included, of whom 321 (79.5%) had HFrEF and 83 (20.5%) HFmrEF. Compared to the former, those with HFmrEF had a significantly higher mean peak oxygen uptake (pVO2) (20.2±6.1 vs 16.1±5.0 mL/kg/min; p<0.001), lower median minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production (VE/VCO2) [35.0 (IQR: 29.1–41.2) vs 39.0 (IQR: 32.0–47.0); p=0.002) and fewer patients with exercise oscillatory ventilation (EOV) (22.0 vs 46.3%; p<0.001). Over a median follow-up of 28.7 (IQR: 13.0–92.3) months, 117 (28.9%) patients died, 53 (13.1%) underwent heart transplantation, and 134 (33.2%) had at least one HF hospitalization. In both HFmrEF and HFrEF, pVO2 <12 mL/kg/min, VE/VCO2 >35 and EOV identified patients at higher risk for events (all p<0.05). In Cox regression multivariate analysis, pVO2 was predictive of the primary endpoint in both HFmrEF and HFrEF (HR per +1 mL/kg/min: 0.81; CI: 0.72–0.92; p=0.001; and HR per +1 mL/kg/min: 0.92; CI: 0.87–0.97; p=0.004), as was EOV (HR: 4.79; CI: 1.41–16.39; p=0.012; and HR: 2.15; CI: 1.51–3.07; p<0.001). VE/VCO2, on the other hand, was predictive of events in HFrEF but not in HFmrEF (HR per unit: 1.03; CI: 1.02–1.05; p<0.001; and HR per unit: 0.99; CI: 0.95–1.03; p=0.512, respectively). ROC curve analysis demonstrated that a pVO2 >16.7 and >15.8 mL/kg/min more accurately identified patients at lower risk for the primary endpoint (NPV: 91.2 and 60.5% for HFmrEF and HFrEF, respectively; both p<0.001). Conclusions CPET is a useful tool in HFmrEF. Both pVO2 and EOV independently predicted the primary endpoint in HFmrEF and HFrEF, contrasting with VE/VCO2, which remained predictive only in latter group. Our findings strengthen the prognostic role of CPET in HF with either reduced or mid-range LVEF. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

OC-0322: 4-miRNA signature and MGMT promoter methylation improve risk stratification in glioblastoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. S169-S170
Author(s):  
K. Unger ◽  
D.F. Fleischmann ◽  
V. Ruf ◽  
J. Felsberg ◽  
D. Piehlmaier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Promoter Methylation ◽  
Mgmt Promoter Methylation ◽  
Mirna Signature ◽  
Improve Risk Stratification ◽  
Mgmt Promoter

scholarly journals Patients in intensive care unit for COVID-19 pneumonia: the lung ultrasound patterns at admission and discharge. An observational pilot study

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Persona Paolo ◽  
Valeri Ilaria ◽  
Zarantonello Francesco ◽  
Forin Edoardo ◽  
Sella Nicolò ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Specific Pattern ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Left Hemithorax ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Right ◽  
B Lines

Abstract Background During COVID-19 pandemic, optimization of the diagnostic resources is essential. Lung Ultrasound (LUS) is a rapid, easy-to-perform, low cost tool which allows bedside investigation of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We aimed to investigate the typical ultrasound patterns of COVID-19 pneumonia and their evolution at different stages of the disease. Methods We performed LUS in twenty-eight consecutive COVID-19 patients at both admission to and discharge from one of the Padua University Hospital Intensive Care Units (ICU). LUS was performed using a low frequency probe on six different areas per each hemithorax. A specific pattern for each area was assigned, depending on the prevalence of A-lines (A), non-coalescent B-lines (B1), coalescent B-lines (B2), consolidations (C). A LUS score (LUSS) was calculated after assigning to each area a defined pattern. Results Out of 28 patients, 18 survived, were stabilized and then referred to other units. The prevalence of C pattern was 58.9% on admission and 61.3% at discharge. Type B2 (19.3%) and B1 (6.5%) patterns were found in 25.8% of the videos recorded on admission and 27.1% (17.3% B2; 9.8% B1) on discharge. The A pattern was prevalent in the anterosuperior regions and was present in 15.2% of videos on admission and 11.6% at discharge. The median LUSS on admission was 27.5 [21–32.25], while on discharge was 31 [17.5–32.75] and 30.5 [27–32.75] in respectively survived and non-survived patients. On admission the median LUSS was equally distributed on the right hemithorax (13; 10.75–16) and the left hemithorax (15; 10.75–17). Conclusions LUS collected in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure at ICU admission and discharge appears to be characterized by predominantly lateral and posterior non-translobar C pattern and B2 pattern. The calculated LUSS remained elevated at discharge without significant difference from admission in both groups of survived and non-survived patients.

scholarly journals Role of Provocable Brugada ECG Pattern in The Correct Risk Stratification for Major Arrhythmic Events

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1025
Author(s):  
Nicolò Martini ◽  
Martina Testolina ◽  
Gian Luca Toffanin ◽  
Rocco Arancio ◽  
Luca De Mattia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sudden Death ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Right Ventricular ◽  
Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Right Ventricular Outflow Tract ◽  
Ventricular Outflow Tract ◽  
Conduction Delay ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
The Right

The so-called Brugada syndrome (BS), first called precordial early repolarization syndrome (PERS), is characterized by the association of a fascinating electrocardiographic pattern, namely an aspect resembling right bundle branch block with a coved and sometime upsloping ST segment elevation in the precordial leads, and major ventricular arrhythmic events that could rarely lead to sudden death. Its electrogenesis has been related to a conduction delay mostly, but not only, located on the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT), probably due to a progressive fibrosis of the conduction system. Many tests have been proposed to identify people at risk of sudden death and, among all, ajmaline challenge, thanks to its ability to enhance latent conduction defects, became so popular, even if its role is still controversial as it is neither specific nor sensitive enough to guide further invasive investigations and managements. Interestingly, a type 1 pattern has also been induced in many other cardiac diseases or systemic diseases with a cardiac involvement, such as long QT syndrome (LQTS), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and myotonic dystrophy, without any clear arrhythmic risk profile. Evidence-based studies clearly showed that a positive ajmaline test does not provide any additional information on the risk stratification for major ventricular arrhythmic events on asymptomatic individuals with a non-diagnostic Brugada ECG pattern.

EP.FRI.12Meta-analysis of demographic and prognostic significance of right-sided versus left-sided acute diverticulitis

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahab Hajibandeh ◽  
Shahin Hajibandeh ◽  
Neil J Smart ◽  
Andrew Maw
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Conservative Management ◽  
Emergency Surgery ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Colonic Diverticulitis ◽  
Co Morbidity ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
The Right ◽  
Acute Colonic Diverticulitis

Abstract Aims To compare the demographic and prognostic outcomes of right-sided versus left-sided acute colonic diverticulitis Methods We performed a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA statement standards to identify all observational studies comparing demographic factors and outcomes of right-sided versus left-sided acute colonic diverticulitis. We used the ROBINS-I tool to assess the risk of bias of included studies. Random effects modelling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Results Analysis of 2933 patients from nine studies suggests that right-sided diverticulitis affects younger patients (MD:-14.16,P<0.00001) and more male patients (OR:1.33,P=0.02) compared with left-sided diverticulitis. Smoking (OR:2.23,P<0.0001), alcohol consumption (OR:1.85,P=0.002) and co-morbidity (OR:0.21,P<0.00001) were more common in patients with right-sided diverticulitis. The risk of complicated diverticulitis was lower in the right-sided group (OR:0.21,P=0.001). More patients in the right-sided diverticulitis group had modified Hinchey stage I disease (OR:10.21,P<0.0001) while more patients in the left-sided group had stage II (OR:0.19,P<0.00001), stage III (OR:0.08,P=0.009) or stage IV disease (OR:0.02,P<0.00001). Right-sided diverticulitis was associated with a lower risk of recurrence (OR:0.49,P=0.04), failure of conservative management (OR:0.14,P=0.0006), the need for emergency surgery (OR:0.13,<0.00001) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD:-1.70,P=0.02). Conclusions Right-sided acute colonic diverticulitis predominantly affects younger male patients compared with left-sided disease and is associated with favourable outcomes as indicated by the lower risk of complications, failure of conservative management, need for emergency surgery, recurrence, and shorter length of hospital stay. More studies are required to compare the postoperative outcomes in patients with right-sided and left-sided diverticulitis undergoing emergency surgery.

Abstract 14873: Is There Difference in Clinical Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) between Hospitals With and Without Onsite Cardiac Surgery Backup?

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomonori Akasaka ◽  
Seiji Hokimoto ◽  
Noriaki Tabata ◽  
Kenji Sakamoto ◽  
Kenichi Tsujita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Bleeding Complications ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

Background: Based on 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI PCI guideline, it is recommended that PCI should be performed at hospital with onsite cardiac surgery. But, recent data suggests that there is no significant difference in clinical outcomes following primary or elective PCI between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery. The proportion of PCI centers without onsite cardiac surgery comprises approximately more than half of all PCI centers in Japan. We examined the impact of with or without onsite cardiac surgery on clinical outcomes following PCI to ACS. Methods: From Aug 2008 to March 2011, subjects (n=2288) were enrolled from the Kumamoto Intervention Conference Study (KICS), which is a multicenter registry, and enrolling consecutive patients undergoing PCI in 15 centers in Japan. Patients were assigned to two groups treated in hospitals with (n=1954) or without (n=334) onsite cardiac surgery. Clinical events were followed up for 12 months. Primary endpoint was in-hospital death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. And we monitored other events those were non-cardiovascular deaths, bleeding complications, revascularizations, and emergent CABG. Results: There was no overall significant difference in primary endpoint between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery (9.6%vs9.5%; P=0.737). There was also no significant difference when events in primary endpoint were considered separately. In other events, only revascularization was more frequently seen in hospitals with onsite cardiac surgery (22.1%vs12.9%; P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis for primary endpoint showed that there was no significant difference between two groups (Log Rank P=0.943). By cox proportional hazards model analysis for primary endpoint, without onsite cardiac surgery was not a predictive factor for primary endpoint (HR 0.969, 95%CI 0.704-1.333; P=0.845). We performed propensity score matching analysis to correct for the disparate patient numbers between two groups, and there was also no significant difference for primary endpoint (6.9% vs 8.0%; P=0.544). Conclusions: There is no significant difference in clinical outcomes following PCI for ACS between hospitals with and without onsite cardiac surgery backup in Japan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document