Acute pulmonary embolism in a patient with mild COVID-19 symptoms: a case report

Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with COVID-19: Comparison between Different Care Settings

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop pulmonary embolism (PE) in the full spectrum of patient care settings need to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics, treatment, and 90-day outcomes in patients diagnosed with PE while recovering from COVID-19 in the outpatient setting versus those who were diagnosed with PE while being hospitalized with COVID-19. Data from the international Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) registry were used. The major study outcomes were all-cause death, major bleeding, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrences during the first 90 days after PE. From March 2020 to March 2021, 737 patients with COVID-19 experienced acute PE. Of these, 340 (46%) were recovering from COVID-19 as outpatients (267 patients who had been treated at home for COVID-19 and 73 discharged after being hospitalized with COVID-19). Compared with inpatients with COVID-19, those recovering in the outpatient setting upon PE were less likely to be men (odds ratio [OR]: 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.72) and less likely to have hypertension (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.74) or diabetes (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76). At 90-day follow-up, eight patients (none recovering from COVID-19 as outpatient vs. 2.4% of inpatients with COVID-19) developed recurrent VTE, 34 (1.9 vs. 7.9%) had major bleeding, and 128 (10 vs. 24%) died. On multivariable analysis, inpatients with COVID-19 were at a higher risk of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 6.80; 95% CI: 1.52-30.4) or death (adjusted HR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.40-3.58). In conclusion, using a large multinational registry of patients with COVID-19 who experienced PE, thromboembolic episodes occurring in those recovering from COVID-19 as outpatients were associated with less ominous outcomes than inpatients with COVID-19.

Venous thromboembolism in COVID-19: A meta-summary of cases

OBJECTIVES

To summarize cases of venous thromboembolism (VTE), including pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) among coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients and discuss their symptoms, diagnostic method, clinical features, and prognosis.

METHODS

All major databases were searched for relevant studies published between December 1, 2019 and May 5, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 233 articles were identified, 22 describing 48 patients were included. A total of 79.1% had PE and 20.9% had DVT. Most patients were men, with a mean age of 56 years. Comorbidities were present in 70.8%, and 85.4% had at least one risk factor of VTE. 56.3% had received anticoagulation therapy. Most patients were treated in the general ward. Complications occurred in 27.1% of the patients, and recovery was achieved in 80.4%.

CONCLUSION

Venous thromboembolism must be suspected even in patients who had received prior anticoagulant regimens or in stable cases, especially in males, the elderly, and patients with comorbidities and high D-dimer levels.

Hormonal Contraception and Massive Pulmonary Embolism in a COVID-19 Ambulatory Patient: A Case Report

Coronavirus 19 disease (COVID-19) presents a highly variable clinical presentation and course, ranging from asymptomatic patients to rapidly progressive, fatal pneumonia. The known heterogeneous outcomes can affect both previously healthy patients and those with significant comorbidities, who develop clinical courses with possibly more multisystemic compromise. Likewise, the development of thrombotic phenomena during the acute course of the disease is associated with complications that worsen patient prognosis. We present a case report of a 45-year-old multiparous patient with a history of overweight and chronic use of oral hormonal contraception with low doses of levonorgestrel and estradiol as the only risk factors favoring the development of thrombotic events. During her outpatient COVID-19 clinical course, she developed massive pulmonary thromboembolism resulting in secondary obstructive shock, which required pharmacological thrombolysis. At discharge, hormonal contraception was considered contraindicated, and the patient was released from our institution with continued oral anticoagulant therapy. COVID-19 infection, contraceptive hormone therapy, and overweight are known risk factors for the development of thromboembolic events. The impact of their concomitance has not been studied to date. From our experience, we discuss the impact these risk factors have when present together and invite others to report similar cases.

Post-Discharge Prophylactic Anticoagulation in COVID-19 Patients: A Clinical Dilemma

COVID-19 pandemic has taken a great toll on the health care system worldwide. Along with the pandemic, there is also a concern regarding post COVID-19 complications in recovered patients. Thromboembolism (TE) has been reported as a fatal complication in recovered patients with COVID-19. There is still a great dilemma in post-discharge TE prophylaxis and its long-term benefits. We reported three cases of post COVID-19 with complications related to both diseases as well as post discharge anticoagulant therapy. The first case is about a 60-yr-old male who developed Covid-19 pneumonia (moderate disease) and was discharged on rivaroxaban after initial improvement. 3 weeks later, the patient was readmitted with lower gastro-intestinal bleeding. The other two cases developed pulmonary thromboembolism within a span of 2-3 months (after recovered from Covid-19 pneumonia). Both these patients were not prescribed anticoagulants for TE prophylaxis. There is an imperative need for effective guidelines for post discharge TE prophylaxis in COVID-19.

Cardiovascular Involvement in COVID-19: What Sequelae Should We Expect?

Several forms of cardiovascular involvement have been described in patients with Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19): myocardial injury, acute coronary syndrome, acute heart failure, myocarditis, pericardial diseases, arrhythmias, takotsubo syndrome, and arterial and venous atherothrombotic and thromboembolic events. Data on long-term outcome of these patients are still sparse, and the type and real incidence of cardiovascular sequelae are poorly known. It is plausible that myocardial injury may be the initiator of an inflammatory cascade, edema, and subsequent fibrosis, but also a consequence of systemic inflammation. The extent and distribution of ongoing inflammation may be the basis for ventricular dysfunction and malignant arrhythmias. Indeed, preliminary observational findings seem to emphasize the importance of close monitoring of COVID-19 patients with myocardial injury after discharge. Residual subclinical disease may be effectively investigated by using second-level imaging modalities such as cardiac magnetic resonance, which allows better characterization of the type and extension of myocardial damage, as well as of the ongoing inflammation after the acute phase. In patients with venous thromboembolism, a very common complication of COVID-19, the type and the duration of anticoagulation therapy after the acute phase should be tailored to the patient and based on the estimation of the individual thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risk. Large randomized clinical trials are ongoing to address this clinical question. Whether the severity of cardiovascular involvement, the type of treatments adopted during the acute phase, and the hemodynamic response, may influence the long-term outcome of patients recovered from COVID-19 is unknown. An etiological diagnosis of myocardial injury during the hospitalization is the first step for an appropriate follow-up in these patients. After discharge, the screening for residual left and right ventricular dysfunction, arrhythmias, residual thrombosis, and myocardial scar should be considered on a case-by-case basis, whereas an active clinical surveillance is mandatory in any patient.