Association of Sedentary and Active Bout Frequency With Mortality in Older Men Using Accelerometry

Background Time spent sedentary increases with age and has several negative health consequences. We sought to examine associations between daily sedentary and active bout frequency with all-cause mortality. Methods Data are from 2,918 men in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) study (mean age at Visit 3±SD: 79.0±5.1 years) with valid activity monitor data (5.1±0.3 days worn>90%) at Year 7 visit (Visit 3, 2007-2009). Sedentary and active bout frequencies are defined as the daily transition frequency from a sedentary bout lasting 5+ minutes to activity of any intensity, and the transition frequency from an active bout lasting 5+ minutes to sedentary. Deaths were centrally adjudicated using death certificates. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine associations between quartiles of sedentary (Q1 referent, <13.6 bouts/day) or active (Q1 referent, <5 bouts/day) bout frequency and mortality. Models were repeated, stratifying by median daily total time spent sedentary and active. Results After 9.4±3.7 years of follow-up, 1,487 (51.0%) men died. Men averaged 16.9±5.1 and 8.2±4.2 sedentary and active bouts/day, respectively. After full covariate adjustment, each quartile reflecting a higher sedentary (Q4 vs Q1 HR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.58-0.81, p-trend<0.001) and active bout (Q4 vs Q1 HR: 0.57, 95%CI: 0.48-0.68, p-trend<0.001) frequency was associated with lower mortality risk. There was no evidence that effects differed by total sedentary time (p-interaction for sedentary bout frequency and total sedentary time>0.05). Conclusions More frequent, prolonged sedentary and active bouts are associated with a lower mortality risk in older men and is not moderated by total sedentary time.

230 Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in COVID-19. Results from a multi-centre international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID)

Aims Standard therapy for Corona-virus-19 disease (COVID-19) is mainly developed for critical ill patients. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin rich micro-thrombi in several organs. Aim of the study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Methods and results 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre-international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. Antiplatelet (AP) regimen, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, was obtained for each patient. During hospitalization 730 (9%) patients received AP drugs with single (93%, n = 680) or dual APT (7%, n = 50). Patients treated with APT were older (74 ± 12 vs. 63 ± 17 years, P < 0.01), more frequently male (68% vs. 57%, P < 0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs. 16%, P < 0.01). Patients treated with APT compared with no APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs. 19%, P = 0.64, Log Rank P = 0.23), need of invasive ventilation (8.7% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs. 2.5% P = 0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.43) but shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8 ± 5 vs. 11 ± 7 days, P = 0.01); however, when comparing patients with APT vs. no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (Log Rank P < 0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70–0.94). At multivariable analysis in-hospital APT was associated with a lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI: 0.32–0.48, P < 0.01). Conclusions APT during hospitalization for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding.

123 Prophylactic anticoagulation and aspirin therapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-matched analysis of the hope-COVID-19 registry

Aims No standard therapy is currently recommended for moderately ill Corona-virus-19 disease (COVID-19) patients. Potential benefit in terms of survival for anticoagulation were found only in this subset of patients. Aim of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of add-on antiplatelet therapy with aspirin over prophylactic anticoagulation (PAC) in COVID-19 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. Methods and results 7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre-international prospective registry (HOPE-COVID-19). Clinical data and in-hospital complications, including mortality, were recorded. Study population included only patients treated with aspirin and/or PAC. A comparison of clinical outcomes between add-on antiplatelet therapy and PAC and patients treated with PAC only was performed using an adjusted analysis with propensity score (PS) matching. Of 7824 patients, 360 (4.6%) received PAC and aspirin and 2949 (37.6%) PAC only. Propensity-score matching yielded 298 patients from each group. Mean age was 73 ± 11 years, 67% were male, prevalence of hypertension and diabetes was 79% and 33%, respectively, and 7.5 % underwent invasive ventilation. In the propensity score-matched population, cumulative incidence curves of in-hospital mortality were lower in patients treated with PAC and Aspirin vs. PAC only (15% vs. 21%, Log Rank P = 0.01). At multivariable analysis in propensity matched population of COVID-19 patients, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, kidney failure and invasive ventilation, aspirin treatment was associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality (HR: 0.62, CI: 95% 0.42–0.92, P = 0.018). Conclusions Add-on anti-platelet therapy with aspirin over PAC in COVID-19 hospitalized patients was associated with lower mortality risk in a propensity score matched population.

Antiplatelet therapy and outcome in COVID-19: the Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation Registry

BackgroundStandard therapy for COVID-19 is continuously evolving. Autopsy studies showed high prevalence of platelet-fibrin-rich microthrombi in several organs. The aim of the study was therefore to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and its impact on survival.Methods7824 consecutive patients with COVID-19 were enrolled in a multicentre international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation-COVID-19 Registry). Clinical data and in-hospital complications were recorded. Data on APT, including aspirin and other antiplatelet drugs, were obtained for each patient.ResultsDuring hospitalisation, 730 (9%) patients received single APT (93%, n=680) or dual APT (7%, n=50). Patients treated with APT were older (74±12 years vs 63±17 years, p<0.01), more frequently male (68% vs 57%, p<0.01) and had higher prevalence of diabetes (39% vs 16%, p<0.01). Patients treated with APT showed no differences in terms of in-hospital mortality (18% vs 19%, p=0.64), need for invasive ventilation (8.7% vs 8.5%, p=0.88), embolic events (2.9% vs 2.5% p=0.34) and bleeding (2.1% vs 2.4%, p=0.43), but had shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (8±5 days vs 11±7 days, p=0.01); however, when comparing patients with APT versus no APT and no anticoagulation therapy, APT was associated with lower mortality rates (log-rank p<0.01, relative risk 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.94). On multivariable analysis, in-hospital APT was associated with lower mortality risk (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.48, p<0.01).ConclusionsAPT during hospitalisation for COVID-19 could be associated with lower mortality risk and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, without increased risk of bleeding.Trial registration numberNCT04334291.

The Association of the Consumption Time for Different Food with the Cardiovascular Disease and All-Cause Mortality Among Diabetes Patients

Background: This study aims to investigate whether food consumed time and distribution at three-meals is associated with long-term survival among the people with diabetes. Methods:This study included 4,699 diabetes patients participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 2003 to 2014. Food consumed across a day including the forenoon, afternoon, evening, were divided into quantiles based on their distribution. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze the survival relationship between food intakes time and distribution (with a constant quality and quantity) and mortality. Results:After adjustment for multiple covariates, in the forenoon, compared to the participants with diabetes in the lowest consumption quantile of potato and starchy-vegetable, participants with diabetes in the highest consumption quantile had lower mortality risk of CVD(HRpotato=0.52, 95%CI: 0.38-0.87; HRstarchy-vegetable= 0.51, 95%CI: 0.29-0.90). In the evening, the highest quantile of dark-vegetable intake is related to lower mortality risk of CVD(HR=0.64, 95%CI: 0.45-0.92) and all-cause(HR=0.81, 95%CI: 0.66-0.99), whereas participants in the highest quantile of intakes of refined grain and processed meat are more likely to die due to CVD(HRrefined-grain=1.54, 95%CI:1.10-2.15; HRprocessed-meat=1.83, 95%CI:1.20-2.77) and all-cause(HRrefined-grain=1.29, 95%CI:1.01-1.65; HRprocessed-meat=1.37, 95%CI:1.06-1.75). Iso-calorically switching 0.1 serving refined grain or processed meat consumed in the evening to the forenoon, and 0.1 serving dark vegetable consumed in the afternoon to the evening reduced the risk of CVD mortality.Conclusions:Higher intake of potato, starchy-vegetable in forenoon, dark-vegetable in the evening, and lower intake of refined-grain and processed-meat in the evening was associated with better long-term survival in people with diabetes.

Inotrope Use and Intensive Care Unit Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock: An Analysis of a Large Electronic Intensive Care Unit Database

Purpose: To determine whether inotrope administration is associated with increased all-cause mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients and to identify inotropes superior for improving mortality.Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data retrieved from the Philips Electronic ICU (eICU) database, a clinical database of 200,859 patients from over 208 hospitals located throughout the United States. The database was searched for patients admitted with CS to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 2014 and 2015. We evaluated 34,381 CS patients. They were classified into the inotrope and non-inotrope groups based on whether inotropes were administered during hospitalization. The primary endpoint was all-cause hospital mortality.Findings: In total, 15,021 (43.69%) patients received inotropes during hospitalization. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the inotrope group than in the non-inotrope group (2,999 [24.03%] vs. 1,547 [12.40%], adjusted hazard ratio: 2.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09–2.39; p &lt; 0.0001). After propensity score matching according to the cardiac index, 359 patients were included in each group. The risk of ICU (OR 5.65, 95% CI, 3.17–10.08, p &lt; 0.001) and hospital (OR 2.63, 95% CI: 1.75–3.95, p &lt; 0.001) mortality in the inotrope group was significantly higher. In the inotrope group, the administration of norepinephrine ≤0.1 μg/kg/min and dopamine ≤15 μg/kg/min did not increase the risk of hospital mortality, and milrinone administration was associated with a lower mortality risk (odds ratio: 0.559, 95% CI: 0.430–0.727, p &lt; 0.001). Meanwhile, the administration of &gt;0.1 μg/kg/min dobutamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine and dopamine &gt;15 μg/kg/min was associated with a higher risk of hospital mortality.Conclusions: Inotropes should be used cautiously because they may be associated with a higher risk of mortality in CS patients. Low-dose norepinephrine and milrinone may associated with lower risk of hospital mortality in these patients, and supportive therapies should be considered when high-dose inotropes are administered.

Mortality Risk of Antidiabetic Agents for Type 2 Diabetes With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AimsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess various antidiabetic agents’ association with mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who have coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsWe performed comprehensive literature retrieval from the date of inception until February 2, 2021, in medical databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library), regarding mortality outcomes in patients with T2DM who have COVID-19. Pooled OR and 95% CI data were used to assess relationships between antidiabetic agents and mortality.ResultsEighteen studies with 17,338 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Metformin (pooled OR, 0.69; P=0.001) and sulfonylurea (pooled OR, 0.80; P=0.016) were associated with lower mortality risk in patients with T2DM who had COVID-19. However, patients with T2DM who had COVID-19 and received insulin exhibited greater mortality (pooled OR, 2.20; P=0.002). Mortality did not significantly differ (pooled OR, 0.72; P=0.057) between DPP-4 inhibitor users and non-users.ConclusionsMetformin and sulfonylurea could be associated with reduced mortality risk in patients with T2DM who have COVID-19. Furthermore, insulin use could be associated with greater mortality, while DPP-4 inhibitor use could not be. The effects of antidiabetic agents in patients with T2DM who have COVID-19 require further exploration.Systematic Review RegistrationPROSPERO (identifier, CRD42021242898).

221Association of physical activity bout length and changing intensity with mortality in UK Biobank

Background Spending more time active (and less time sedentary) is associated with many health benefits but it is unclear whether these associations differ depending on whether time spent sedentary or in moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) is accumulated in long or short bouts. We used a novel analytical approach to examine whether length of sedentary and MVPA bouts associates with all-cause mortality. Methods We used data on 79,507 participants from UK Biobank. We derived the total time participants spent in activity categories (sleep, sedentary, light activity and MVPA) and in sedentary and MVPA bouts of short (1-15 minutes), medium (16-40 minutes) and long (41+ minutes) duration, on average per day. We used Cox proportion hazards regression to estimate the association of spending 10 minutes more average daily time in one activity or bout length category, coupled with spending 10 minutes less time in another, with all-cause mortality. Results Those spending more time in MVPA had lower mortality risk, irrespective of whether this replaced time spent sleeping, sedentary or in light activity. We found little evidence to suggest that mortality risk differed depending on the length of sedentary or MVPA bouts. Conclusions We uniquely show that higher total MVPA improves health irrespective of whether it is obtained from several short bouts or fewer longer bouts, supporting recent policy changes in some countries. Key messages Our results suggest that time spent in MVPA associates with lower mortality risk irrespective of whether it is obtained from several short bouts or fewer longer bouts.