COVID-19 mortality in patients on anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents

Anticoagulant use before COVID-19 diagnosis prevent COVID-19 associated acute venous thromboembolism or not: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coagulopathy and thromboembolic events are associated with poor outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. There is conflicting evidence on the effects of chronic anticoagulation on mortality and severity of COVID-19 disease.

AIM

To summarize the body of evidence on the effects of pre-hospital anticoagulation on outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

A Literature search was performed on LitCovid PubMed, WHO, and Scopus databases from inception (December 2019) till June 2023 for original studies reporting an association between prior use of anticoagulants and patient outcomes in adults with COVID-19. The primary outcome was the risk of thromboembolic events in COVID-19 patients taking anticoagulants. Secondary outcomes included COVID-19 disease severity, in terms of intensive care unit admission or invasive mechanical ventilation/intubation requirement in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, and mortality. The random effects models were used to calculate crude and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs).

RESULTS

Forty-six observational studies met our inclusion criteria. The unadjusted analysis found no association between prior anticoagulation and thromboembolic event risk [n = 43851, 9 studies, odds ratio (OR)= 0.67 (0.22, 2.07); P = 0.49; I 2 = 95%]. The association between prior anticoagulation and disease severity was non-significant [n = 186782; 22 studies, OR = 1.08 (0.78, 1.49); P = 0.64; I 2 = 89%]. However, pre-hospital anticoagulation significantly increased all-cause mortality risk [n = 207292; 35 studies, OR = 1.72 (1.37, 2.17); P < 0.00001; I 2 = 93%]. Pooling adjusted estimates revealed a statistically non-significant association between pre-hospital anticoagulation and thromboembolic event risk [aOR = 0.87 (0.42, 1.80); P = 0.71], mortality [aOR = 0.94 (0.84, 1.05); P = 0.31], and disease severity [aOR = 0.96 (0.72, 1.26); P = 0.76].

CONCLUSION

Prehospital anticoagulation was not significantly associated with reduced risk of thromboembolic events, improved survival, and lower disease severity in COVID-19 patients.

Retrospective evaluation of acute kidney injury in paediatric COVID-19 patients: a tertiary referral hospital experience

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been recognised as a risk factor for acute kidney injury (AKI). Our aim was to investigate the risk factors contributing to hospitalised and outpatient paediatric COVID-19-associated AKI.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted on patients aged 1 month to 18 years with diagnosed COVID-19-associated AKI applied to a tertiary paediatric referral hospital between March 1, 2020 and March 1, 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 6683 patients were evaluated and 486 patients were included in the study. Acute kidney injury was observed in 3.7% of outpatients and 23.9% of hospitalised patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that, on admission, a history of contact with a COVID-19 positive person (p < 0.001), age below 12 months (p = 0.004), presence of comorbidities (p < 0.001), abdominal pain (p = 0.008), anorexia (p = 0.003), dyspnoea (p = 0.005), higher lactate dehydrogenase values (p = 0.004), neutrophilia (p < 0.001), higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (p = 0.003), higher white blood cell counts (p = 0.006), elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (p = 0.002), anaemia (p = 0.015), hypoalbuminaemia (p < 0.001), hyperglycaemia (p = 0.006), and presence of proteinuria (p = 0.003) were independent predictors of AKI. Higher rates of hospitalisation (p < 0.001) and admission to the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) (p < 0.001), longer length of hospitalisation (p < 0.001), and greater need for mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001) were associated with AKI.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals that not only hospitalised children, but also paediatric patients are at risk for AKI. The presence of comorbidities, abdominal pain, anorexia, dyspnoea, anaemia, inflammation, hypoalbuminaemia, proteinuria and history of contact with a COVID-19 positive person were the main risk factors for AKI. COVID-19-associated AKI was associated with worse outcomes.

A Retrospective Study on the Outcome of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients Admitted to a District General Hospital and Predictors of High Mortality

BACKGROUND

The clinical features and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vary between patients and countries. Patients with certain conditions are predisposed to poor outcomes compared with those without medical conditions, such as diabetes, dementia, and hypertension (HTN).

METHODS

The aim of this retrospective study was to assess factors associated with higher mortality in patients with COVID-19 infections and to identify the reason for hospital admission in these patients. The study was performed on patients admitted between 1 and 31 March 2020. Data collection was done retrospectively from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

There were 269 patient admissions during this period, of which 147 were included in this audit. The mean age of COVID-19-positive patients was 62.8 years and 65.9 years for COVID-19-negative patients during this period. Forty-seven patients requiring hospital admission were COVID-19 positive and 93 were COVID-19 negative. There were no COVID-19 swabs in the seven patients included in the audit. Approximately 50% of the COVID-19-positive patients presented with fever and shortness of breath (sob), followed by dyspnea and cough (seven patients). The most common comorbidity was HTN, followed by type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and ischemic heart disease (IHD). The survival rate was 72.3% in COVID-19-positive patients and 80% in COVID-19-negative patients. The average length of stay was 14.4 days for COVID-19-positive survivors compared to 7.8 days for COVID-19-negative survivors. Most patients who tested positive for COVID-19 infection received oseltamivir vaccination and antibiotics. The presence of HTN, diabetes mellitus (DM), age, and organ failure was associated with a high mortality risk.

CONCLUSION

Our study supports the findings of previous studies that diabetes, HTN, coronary artery disease, old age, and organ failure were associated with high mortality in patients admitted to hospitals with COVID-19 infections.

Effect of antiplatelet therapy after COVID-19 diagnosis: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may predispose patients to thrombotic disease in the venous and arterial circulations.

METHODS

Based on the current debate on antiplatelet therapy in COVID-19 patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of antiplatelet treatments. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science on February 1, 2023, and only included Randomized clinical trials. The study followed PRISMA guidelines and used Random-effects models to estimate the pooled percentage and its 95% CI.

RESULTS

Five unique eligible studies were included, covering 17,950 patients with COVID-19. The result showed no statistically significant difference in the relative risk of all-cause death in antiplatelet therapy versus non-antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.83-1.05, P = 0.26, I2 = 32%). Compared to no antiplatelet therapy, patients who received antiplatelet therapy had a significantly increased relative risk of major bleeding (RR 1.81, 95%CI 1.09-3.00, P = 0.02, I2 = 16%). The sequential analysis suggests that more RCTs are needed to draw more accurate conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the use of antiplatelet agents exhibited no significant benefit on all-cause death, and the upper bound of the confidence interval on all-cause death (RR 95% CI, 0.83-1.05) suggested that it was unlikely to be a substantiated harm risk associated with this treatment. However, evidence from all RCTs suggested a high risk of major bleeding in antiplatelet agent treatments.

CONCLUSION

According to the results of our sequential analysis, there is not enough evidence available to support or negate the use of antiplatelet agents in COVID-19 cases. The results of ongoing and future well-designed, large, randomized clinical trials are needed.

Drug prescription patterns and their association with mortality and hospitalization duration in COVID-19 patients: insights from big data

Background

Different medication prescription patterns have been associated with varying course of disease and outcomes in COVID-19. Health claims data is a rich source of information on disease treatment and outcomes. We aimed to investigate drug prescription patterns and their association with mortality and hospitalization via insurance data for a relatively long period of the pandemic in Iran.

Methods

We retrieved hospitalized patients' data from Iran Health Insurance Organization (IHIO) spanning 26 months (2020-2022) nationwide. Included were patients with ICD-10 codes U07.1/U07.2 for confirmed/suspected COVID-19. A case was defined as a single hospitalization event for an individual patient. Multiple hospitalizations of a patient within a 30-day interval were aggregated into a single case, while hospitalizations with intervals exceeding 30 days were treated as independent cases. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) was used for medications classification. The two main study outcomes were general and intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization periods and mortality. Besides, various demographic and clinical associate factors were analyzed to derive the associations with medication prescription patterns and study outcomes using accelerated failure time (AFT) and logistic regression models.

Results

During the 26 months of the study period, 1,113,678 admissions with COVID-19 diagnosis at hospitals working in company with IHIO were recorded. 917,198 cases were detected from the database, among which 51.91% were females and 48.09% were males. Among the main groups of medications, antithrombotics (55.84% [95% CI: 55.74-55.94]), corticosteroids (54.14% [54.04-54.24]), and antibiotics (42.22% [42.12-42.32]) were the top used medications among cases with COVID-19. Investigation of the duration of hospitalization based on main medication groups showed antithrombotics (adjusted median ratio = 0.94 [0.94-0.95]) were significantly associated with shorter periods of overall hospitalization. Also, antithrombotics (adjusted odds ratio = 0.74 [95%CI, 0.73-0.76]), corticosteroids (0.97 [0.95-0.99]), antivirals (0.82 [0.80-0.83]), and ACE inhibitor/ARB (0.79 [0.77-0.80]) were significantly associated with lower mortality.

Conclusion

Over 2 years of investigation, antithrombotics, corticosteroids, and antibiotics were the top medications for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Trends in medication prescription varied based on various factors across the country. Medication prescriptions could potentially significantly impact the trends of mortality and hospitalization during epidemics, thereby affecting both health and economic burdens.

Initial therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic therapy with heparins in moderate to severe COVID-19: results of the COVID-PREVENT randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is associated with a prothrombotic state. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic anticoagulation upon hospitalization.

METHODS

COVID-PREVENT, an open-label, multicenter, randomized, clinical trial enrolled patients (≥ 18 years) with moderate to severe COVID-19 and age-adjusted D-dimers > 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN). The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily or thromboprophylaxis with a heparin (SOC) for at least 7 days followed by prophylactic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily for 28 days or no thromboprophylaxis. The primary efficacy outcome was the D-dimer level and the co-primary efficacy outcome the 7-category ordinal COVID-19 scale by WHO at 7 days post randomization. The secondary outcome was time to the composite event of either venous or arterial thromboembolism, new myocardial infarction, non-hemorrhagic stroke, all-cause death or progression to intubation and invasive ventilation up to 35 days post randomization.

RESULTS

The primary efficacy outcome D-dimer at 7 days was not different between patients assigned to therapeutic (n = 55) or prophylactic anticoagulation (n = 56) (1.21 mg/L [0.79, 1.86] vs 1.27 mg/L [0.79, 2.04], p = 0.78). In the whole study population D-dimer was significantly lower at 7 days compared to baseline (1.05 mg/L [0.75, 1.48] vs 1.57 mg/L [1.13, 2.19], p < 0.0001). Therapy with rivaroxaban compared to SOC was not associated an improvement on the WHO 7-category ordinal scale at 7 days (p = 0.085). Rivaroxaban improved the clinical outcome measured by the score in patients with a higher baseline D-dimer  > 2.0 ULN (exploratory analysis; 0.632 [0.516, 0.748], p = 0.026). The secondary endpoint occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 12 (21.4%) in the SOC group (time-to-first occurrence of the components of the secondary outcome: HR 0.5; 95% CI 0.15-1.67; p = 0.264). There was no difference in fatal or non-fatal major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic anticoagulation with rivaroxaban compared to prophylactic anticoagulation with a heparin did not improve surrogates of clinical outcome in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. Whether initial rivaroxaban at therapeutic doses might be superior to thromboprophylaxis in patients with COVID-19 and a high risk as defined by D-dimer  > 2 ULN needs confirmation in further studies.

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease

Background

Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited.

Objectives

To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated.

Results

Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001).

Conclusions

Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).

Coagulopathy and thromboembolic events a pathogenic mechanism of COVID-19 associated with mortality: An updated review

During 2019, the SARS-CoV-2 emerged from China, and during months, COVID-19 spread in many countries around the world. The expanding data about pathogenesis of this virus could elucidate the exact mechanism by which COVID-19 caused death in humans. One of the pathogenic mechanisms of this disease is coagulation. Coagulation disorders that affect both venous and arterial systems occur in patients with COVID-19. The possible mechanism involved in the coagulation could be excessive inflammation induced by SARS-CoV-2. However, it is not yet clear well how SARS-CoV-2 promotes coagulopathy. However, some factors, such as pulmonary endothelial cell damage and some anticoagulant system disorders, are assumed to have an important role. In this study, we assessed conducted studies about COVID-19-induced coagulopathy to obtain clearer vision of the wide range of manifestations and possible pathogenesis mechanisms.

Treatment with prophylactic oral anticoagulants and the risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients: a nationwide cohort study

Background

Venous thromboembolism has been reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It remains unclear if premorbid use of prophylactic oral anticoagulation, for reasons other than COVID-19, protects against death in patients with COVID-19. The aim of this study was to estimate if the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission or intensive care unit (ICU) admission for individuals with verified SARS-CoV-2 was lower if patients used oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy prior to a positive COVID-19 status.

Methods

Data were obtained using national health registries. Cohort entry was the day of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and individuals were followed for 14 days or until death or hospital admission. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard regressions and competing risk analyses were used to estimate the risk of all-cause mortality, hospital admission and ICU admission in OAC users compared with patients with no use of OAC.

Results

In this nationwide cohort study a total of 244 522 individuals were included (median age 35 years (interquartile range 21-52); 124 095 (51%) female), among whom 3710 (1.5%) were OAC users. In the adjusted Cox regression cohort, there was no difference in risk of all-cause mortality in OAC versus non-OAC users. (hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.30). Hospital admission risk (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20) was slightly increased in OAC users, and there was no difference between the groups regarding the risk of ICU admission (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74-1.24).

Conclusions

In individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2, pre-existing treatment with OAC was not associated with prophylactic benefits in the prevention of hospital admission, ICU admissions or death. Prescription patterns should remain unchanged.

Thromboprophylaxis in Pregnant Women with COVID-19: An Unsolved Issue

SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women is of growing interest due to controversy over the use of antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant drugs during pregnancy and postpartum. Pregnant women are susceptible to develop severe forms of viral infections due to pregnancy-related immune alterations, changes in lung functions, and hypercoagulability. The association of pregnancy with SARS-CoV-2 infection can cause an increased incidence of thrombotic complications, especially in the case of patients with some genetic variants that favor inflammation and thrombosis. Compared to the general population, pregnant women may be at increased risk of thrombotic complications related to COVID-19. The lack of extensive clinical trials on thromboprophylaxis and extrapolating data from non-pregnant patients lead to major discrepancies in treating pregnant women with COVID-19. Currently, a multidisciplinary team should determine the dose and duration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy for these patients, depending on the disease severity, the course of pregnancy, and the estimated due date. This narrative review aims to evaluate the protective effect of thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19. It is unknown at this time whether antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy initiated at the beginning of pregnancy for various diseases (preeclampsia, intrauterine growth restriction, thrombophilia) offers a degree of protection. The optimal scheme for thromboprophylaxis in pregnant women with COVID-19 must be carefully established through an individualized decision concerning gestational age and the severity of the infection.

Associations between the use of aspirin or other antiplatelet drugs and all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19: A meta-analysis

Introduction: Whether aspirin or other antiplatelet drugs can reduce mortality among patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains controversial.

Methods: We identified randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective studies on associations between aspirin or other antiplatelet drug use and all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19 in the PubMed database between March 2019 and September 2021. Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool were used to assess the risk of bias. The I2 statistic was used to assess inconsistency among trial results. The summary risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were obtained through the meta-analysis.

Results: The 34 included studies comprised three randomized controlled trials, 27 retrospective studies, and 4 prospective cohort studies. The retrospective and prospective cohort studies showed low-to-moderate risks of bias per the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score, while the randomized controlled trials showed low-to-high risks of bias per the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The randomized controlled trials showed no significant effect of aspirin use on all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 {risk ratio (RR), 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90–1.03]}. In retrospective studies, aspirin reduced all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 by 20% [odds ratio (OR), 0.80 (95% CI 0.70–0.93)], while other antiplatelet drugs had no significant effects. In prospective cohort studies, aspirin decreased all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 by 15% [OR, 0.85 (95% CI 0.80–0.90)].

Conclusion: The administration of aspirin may reduce all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19.

The Prediction Value of D-Dimer on Prognosis in Intensive Care Unit among Old Patients ( ≥65 Years): A 9-Year Single-Center Retrospective Study of 9261 Cases

Background

D-dimer (DD) has been indicated as a potential indicator due to its connection with the prognosis of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aging is linked to elevated DD levels in coagulation activation. However, few studies have investigated the correlation of DD with prognosis, especially in the old population. Therefore, this study aims at investigating the correlation of DD with prognosis in shock and perioperative populations over 65 years of age.

Methods

We analyzed 9261 old patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with either confirmed shock or in perioperative period of high-risk surgery, with 8813 of them had DD levels determined on admission. In-hospital mortality, length of ICU stay and ventilation time (VT) associated variables were assessed using generalized linear models.

Results

Although DD levels had no positive correlations with in-hospital mortality (RR, 1.006; 95% CI, 0.998-1.014) and length of ICU stay (RR, 1.012; 95% CI, 0.997-1.028) in Model 3, they were strongly correlated with VT (RR, 1.577; 95% CI, 1.024-2.064). Higher DD levels in females (RR, 1.804; 95% CI, 1.116-2.602), those who used antibiotics (RR, 1.736; 95% CI, 1.092-2.453), those with surgery (RR, 1.640; 95% CI, 1.273-2.114), and those with shock (RR, 1.740; 95% CI, 1.001-2.687) had stronger correlation with longer VT than the counterparts. While patients who were between 65 and 74 years old (RR, 1.023; 95% CI, 1.003-1.043), with no use of antibiotics (RR, 1.007; 95% CI, 1.001-1.013) nor shock (RR, 1.011; 95% CI, 1.002-1.021), but had undergone surgical procedures (RR, 1.030; 95% CI, 1.012-1.048) were correlated with a longer ICU length of stay.

Conclusion

DD levels at ICU admission are highly related to increased VT and length of ICU stay in the old population with either confirmed shock or after high-risk surgery, indicating the strong potential of DD as a marker with prognostic utility for all ICU patients in the future.

The pharmacology of anticoagulant drug treatment options in COVID-19 patients: reviewing real-world evidence in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

The optimal anticoagulation strategy for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention among COVID-19 patients, hospitalized or in the community setting, is still challenging and largely based on real-world evidence.

AREAS COVERED

We analyzed real-world data regarding the safety and effectiveness of anticoagulant treatment, both parenteral and oral, for VTE prevention or atrial fibrillation (AF)/VTE treatment among COVID-19 patients.

EXPERT OPINION

The efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) doses for VTE prevention correlates with COVID-19 disease status. LMWH prophylactic dose may be useful in COVID-19 patients at the early stage of the disease. LMWH intermediate or therapeutic dose is recommended in COVID-19 patients with an advanced stage of the disease. COVID-19 patients on VKAs therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) and VTE should switch to NOACs in the community setting or LMWH in the hospital setting. No definitive data on de-novo starting of NOACs or VKAs therapy for VTE prevention in COVID-19 outpatients are available. In patients at high risk discharged after hospitalization due to COVID-19, thromboprophylaxis with NOACs may be considered.

Six-Month Quality of Life in COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit Survivors

OBJECTIVES

Because there is increasing evidence of serious deterioration in long-term quality of life (QoL) in coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) intensive care unit (ICU) survivors, the authors identified predictors of poor quality of life in these patients.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Research hospital repurposed into a COVID-19 center.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive patients admitted in COVID-19 ICUs between March and June 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

An SF-36 questionnaire, which included physical and mental items, was used six months after patient's discharge.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 403 patients were managed in the ICU, with a hospital mortality of 181 of 403 (44.9%), and 16 (4.0%) patients died within six months. Among the 125 questionnaire responders, only 32.0% and 52% had a normal quality of life in terms of the physical and mental component of health. Multivariate analysis identified low-molecular-weight heparin treatment in the ICU as the only modifiable factor associated with an increase in physical component of QoL odds ratio (OR) 3.341 (95% confidence interval 1.298-8.599), p = 0.012, and age ≥52 years OR 0.223 and female sex OR 0.321 were significantly associated with a decrease in the physical component. Medical history of cerebrovascular insufficiency was significantly associated with a decrease in mental component of QoL OR 0.125, and the only factor associated with an increase in the mental health component was body mass index ≥27.6 kg/m² OR 7.466.

CONCLUSIONS

In COVID-19 ICU survivors the authors identified treatment with low- molecular-weight heparin as a predictor of improved physical component of QoL at 6 months.

The effect of low-dose and high-dose low-molecular-weight-heparin and aspirin thromboprophylaxis on clinical outcome and mortality in critical ill patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of different thromboprophylaxis regimens on clinical outcomes and mortality of critical ill patients with coronavirus disease -19 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We investigated the medical records of patients with positive COVID-19 (using polymerase chain reaction test) who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at Sakarya University Hospital, Sakarya, Turkey, from March 2020 to January 2021. We included patients under anticoagulant therapy in the clinical course. The patients were allocated to 3 groups: Group A - low-dose (prophylactic) low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) therapy, Group B - high-dose (therapeutic) LMWH therapy, and patients that received aspirin additional to the high-dose (therapeutic) LMWH as Group C. Primary outcomes were overall mortality rates and length of stay (LOS) in ICU. Secondary outcomes were rates of major hemorrhagic and thrombotic events.

RESULTS

Records of 475 patients were reviewed and 164 patients were included. No significant difference was detected in mortality rates between groups (p=0.135). Intensive care unit stay was 13 (9-24.5) days in Group A, 11 (8.75-23) days in Group B, and 13 (9-17) days in Group C without a significant difference (p=0.547). No significant difference was detected between groups in terms of thrombotic (p=0.565) and hemorrhagic events (p=0.615).

CONCLUSION

A high-dose anticoagulation therapy and addition of aspirin to LMWH therapy did not decrease the mortality rates and LOS in ICU in critical ill COVİD-19 patients. In addition, it did not increase the incidence of major hemorrhage and major thrombotic events.

Bleeding and thrombosis outcomes in hospitalised COVID-19 patients on low-molecular-weight heparin and antiplatelet therapy

Background. An increased incidence of thromboembolic events in hospitalised COVID‐19 patients has been demonstrated despite the use of low‐molecular‐weight heparin (LMWH). Antiplatelet therapy prior to admission and early in the disease course has been hypothesised to be protective against thrombosis.Objectives. To describe the bleeding and thrombosis outcomes in hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID‐19 receiving LMWH, with and without concomitant antiplatelet therapy. Secondary objectives were to explore predictors of bleeding and thrombosis outcomes, and dosing practices of antiplatelet therapy and LMWH. Methods. We conducted a descriptive, cross‐sectional study of bleeding and thrombosis outcomes at Tygerberg Academic Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa, during the first COVID‐19 wave, in 808 hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID‐19 receiving LMWH with and without concomitant antiplatelet therapy. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed if predictors were deemed statistically and clinically significant. Results. Patients receiving both LMWH and antiplatelet therapy had similar bleeding outcomes compared with patients only receiving LMWH (odds ratio (OR) 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6 ‐ 4.0). Patients receiving both LMWH and antiplatelet therapy had increased odds of developing thrombosis compared with patients only receiving LMWH (OR 4.8; 95% CI 2.1 ‐ 10.7).Conclusion. The bleeding risk in COVID‐19 patients receiving both LMWH and antiplatelet therapy was not significantly increased. A potentially higher risk of thrombosis in patients receiving LMWH and antiplatelet therapy was observed. However, this could reflect confounding by indication. Randomised studies are required to further evaluate the use of antiplatelet therapy to treat hospitalised patients with COVID‐19.

Does aspirin have an effect on risk of death in patients with COVID-19? A meta-analysis

Purpose

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has shown unprecedented impact world-wide since the eruption in late 2019. Importantly, emerging reports suggest an increased risk of thromboembolism development in patients with COVID-19. Meanwhile, it is found that aspirin reduced mortality in critically ill patients with non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Therefore, a meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effects of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted in 10 electronic databases and 4 registries. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (Cis) to estimate the effect of aspirin on COVID-19 mortality. Relevant subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

Results

The results showed that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.50–0.95; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis found that the low-dose group was associated with a reduced COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.48–0.85; P < 0.01). Aspirin use was associated with reduced COVID-19 mortality in Europe and America (crude RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52–0.98; P = 0.04), and results from cohort studies suggested that aspirin use was a protective factor for COVID-19 mortality (adjusted RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.52–0.99; P = 0.04). Meanwhile, aspirin use was not associated with bleeding risk (crude RR 1.22; 95% CI 0.80–1.87; P = 0.96).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis found that aspirin use was associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with COVID-19 and not with an increased risk of bleeding.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03356-5.

Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency and critical care clinician: Medical management

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of cases worldwide. As the pandemic has progressed, the understanding of this disease has evolved.

OBJECTIVE

This is the second part in a series on COVID-19 updates providing a focused overview of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians.

DISCUSSION

COVID-19, caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. A variety of medical therapies have been introduced for use, including steroids, antivirals, interleukin-6 antagonists, monoclonal antibodies, and kinase inhibitors. These agents have each demonstrated utility in certain patient subsets. Prophylactic anticoagulation in admitted patients demonstrates improved outcomes. Further randomized data concerning aspirin in outpatients with COVID-19 are needed. Any beneficial impact of other therapies, such as colchicine, convalescent plasma, famotidine, ivermectin, and vitamins and minerals is not present in reliable medical literature. In addition, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are not recommended.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a focused update of the medical management of COVID-19 for emergency and critical care clinicians to help improve care for these patients.

Effect of ArtemiC in patients with COVID-19: A Phase II prospective study

Despite intensive efforts, there is no effective remedy for COVID‐19. Moreover, vaccination efficacy declines over time and may be compromised against new SARS‐CoV‐2 lineages. Therefore, there remains an unmet need for simple, accessible, low‐cost and effective pharmacological anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 agents. ArtemiC is a medical product comprising artemisinin, curcumin, frankincense and vitamin C, all of which possess anti‐inflammatory and anti‐oxidant properties. The present Phase II placebo‐controlled, double‐blinded, multi‐centred, prospective study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ArtemiC in patients with COVID‐19. The study included 50 hospitalized symptomatic COVID‐19 patients randomized (2:1) to receive ArtemiC or placebo oral spray, twice daily on Days 1 and 2, beside standard care. A physical examination was performed, and vital signs and blood tests were monitored daily until hospital discharge (or Day 15). A PCR assessment of SARS‐CoV‐2 carriage was performed at screening and on last visit. ArtemiC improved NEWS2 in 91% of patients and shortened durations of abnormal SpO₂ levels, oxygen supplementation and fever. No treatment‐related adverse events were reported. These findings suggest that ArtemiC curbed deterioration, possibly by limiting cytokine storm of COVID‐19, thus bearing great promise for COVID‐19 patients, particularly those with comorbidities.

Assessment of Bleeding Risk in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Tertiary Hospital Experience during the Pandemic in a Predominant Minority Population-Bleeding Risk Factors in COVID-19 Patients

Introduction: In the wake of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, our world has faced multiple challenges. Infection with this virus has commonly been associated with thrombotic events. However, little is known about bleeding risk and anticoagulation therapy. This study aims to determine factors that are associated with increased risk of bleeding in COVID-19 patients. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the records of COVID-19 patients admitted during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 through May 2020. Using patient charts, investigators manually collected data regarding patient characteristics and bleeding. Patients were included in the analysis if they had a confirmed COVID-19 PCR test, were older than 18 years of age and were admitted to the hospital. Patients who were pregnant or had incomplete charts were excluded from the study. ANOVA and logistic regression were used to determine the statistical significance of the data using SPSS version 27. Results: A total of 651 patients were included in the analysis out of 685 patients located in the database of COVID-19 infected patients during that time frame. The general characteristics of the patients were as follows: 54.2% were males; females 45.8% ages ranged from 28 to 83 years old (median age = 66 years old). There were 31 patients (4.9%) who required more than 1 unit of packed red blood cell (PRBC). A total of 16 (2.85%) patients had a documented gastrointestinal bleed (GIB), of which 8 received a total of 29 units of PRBC transfusions. The HAS-BLED score (without alcohol/drug due to inadequate charting) is calculated for patients who had a documented GI bleed and who received more than one unit of PRBC. It was noted that the higher the HAS-BLED score the greater the likelihood of having a GI bleed (p < 0.001). The HAS-BLED score (not including alcohol/drug) was also predictive for patients who received more than one unit of PRBC during their hospital stay (p < 0.001). Discussion: Using the HAS-BLED score without alcohol/drugs, patients with COVID-19 can be stratified in regard to their risk of GI bleeding and their risk of transfusion while in the hospital. When administering anticoagulation therapy, cautious monitoring should be carried out. Decisions regarding anticoagulant therapy should be based on individual patient characteristics.

Thrombotic and bleeding events, mortality, and anticoagulant use among 546,656 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States: a retrospective cohort study

This study describes demographics, thrombotic and bleeding events, mortality, and anticoagulant use among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States. Premier Healthcare Database data were analyzed to identify inpatients with a discharge diagnosis for COVID-19 (ICD-10-CM code: U07.1) from April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021, and matched historical controls without COVID-19 (inpatients discharged between April 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019). Thrombotic [including venous thromboembolism (VTE)] and bleeding events were based on ICD-10-CM discharge diagnosis codes. Of the 546,656 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 20.1% were admitted to the ICU, 62.8% were aged ≥ 60 years, 51.5% were male, and 31.0% were non-white. Any thrombotic event was diagnosed in 10.0% of hospitalized and 20.8% of ICU patients with COVID-19 versus (vs) 11.5% and 24.4% for historical controls, respectively. More VTE events were observed in hospitalized and ICU patients with COVID-19 than historical controls (hospitalized: 4.4% vs 2.7%, respectively; ICU: 8.3% vs 5.2%, respectively; both P < 0.0001). Bleeding events were diagnosed in 10.2% of hospitalized and 21.8% of ICU patients with COVID-19 vs 16.0% and 33.2% for historical controls, respectively. Mortality among hospitalized (12.4%) and ICU (38.5%) patients with COVID-19 was higher vs historical controls (2.4%, P < 0.0001 and 9.4%, P < 0.0001, respectively) and higher in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who had thrombotic events (29.4%) vs those without thrombotic events (10.8%, P < 0.0001). VTE and mortality were higher in hospitalized and ICU patients with COVID-19 vs historical controls. The presence of thrombotic events was associated with worse outcomes.

Effect of common maintenance drugs on the risk and severity of COVID-19 in elderly patients

Background

Maintenance drugs are used to treat chronic conditions. Several classes of maintenance drugs have attracted attention because of their potential to affect susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19.

Methods

Using claims data on 20% random sample of Part D Medicare enrollees from April to December 2020, we identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Using a nested case-control design, non-COVID-19 controls were identified by 1:5 matching on age, race, sex, dual-eligibility status, and geographical region. We identified usage of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB), statins, warfarin, direct factor Xa inhibitors, P2Y12 inhibitors, famotidine and hydroxychloroquine based on Medicare prescription claims data. Using extended Cox regression models with time-varying propensity score adjustment we examined the independent effect of each study drug on contracting COVID-19. For severity of COVID-19, we performed extended Cox regressions on all COVID-19 patients, using COVID-19-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality as outcomes. Covariates included gender, age, race, geographic region, low-income indicator, and co-morbidities. To compensate for indication bias related to the use of hydroxychloroquine for the prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19, we censored patients who only started on hydroxychloroquine in 2020.

Results

Up to December 2020, our sample contained 374,229 Medicare patients over 65 who were diagnosed with COVID-19. Among the COVID-19 patients, 278,912 (74.6%) were on at least one study drug. The three most common study drugs among COVID-19 patients were statins 187,374 (50.1%), ACEI 97,843 (26.2%) and ARB 83,290 (22.3%). For all three outcomes (diagnosis, hospitalization and death), current users of ACEI, ARB, statins, warfarin, direct factor Xa inhibitors and P2Y12 inhibitors were associated with reduced risks, compared to never users. Famotidine did not show consistent significant effects. Hydroxychloroquine did not show significant effects after censoring of recent starters.

Conclusion

Maintenance use of ACEI, ARB, warfarin, statins, direct factor Xa inhibitors and P2Y12 inhibitors was associated with reduction in risk of acquiring COVID-19 and dying from it.

Anticoagulants for people hospitalised with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The primary manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is respiratory insufficiency that can also be related to diffuse pulmonary microthrombosis and thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, or arterial thrombosis. People with COVID-19 who develop thromboembolism have a worse prognosis. Anticoagulants such as heparinoids (heparins or pentasaccharides), vitamin K antagonists and direct anticoagulants are used for the prevention and treatment of venous or arterial thromboembolism. Besides their anticoagulant properties, heparinoids have an additional anti-inflammatory potential. However, the benefit of anticoagulants for people with COVID-19 is still under debate.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention in people hospitalised with COVID-19.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and IBECS databases, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and medRxiv preprint database from their inception to 14 April 2021. We also checked the reference lists of any relevant systematic reviews identified, and contacted specialists in the field for additional references to trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs and cohort studies that compared prophylactic anticoagulants versus active comparator, placebo or no intervention for the management of people hospitalised with COVID-19. We excluded studies without a comparator group and with a retrospective design (all previously included studies) as we were able to include better study designs. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and necessity for additional respiratory support. Secondary outcomes were mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, adverse events, length of hospital stay and quality of life.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We used Cochrane RoB 1 to assess the risk of bias for RCTs, ROBINS-I to assess risk of bias for non-randomised studies (NRS) and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data when appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies (16,185 participants) with participants hospitalised with COVID-19, in either intensive care units, hospital wards or emergency departments. Studies were from Brazil (2), Iran (1), Italy (1), and the USA (1), and two involved more than country. The mean age of participants was 55 to 68 years and the follow-up period ranged from 15 to 90 days. The studies assessed the effects of heparinoids, direct anticoagulants or vitamin K antagonists, and reported sparse data or did not report some of our outcomes of interest: necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life. Higher-dose versus lower-dose anticoagulants (4 RCTs, 4647 participants) Higher-dose anticoagulants result in little or no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.16, 4489 participants; 4 RCTs) and increase minor bleeding (RR 3.28, 95% CI 1.75 to 6.14, 1196 participants; 3 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (high-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants probably reduce pulmonary embolism (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70, 4360 participants; 4 RCTs), and slightly increase major bleeding (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.80, 4400 participants; 4 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (moderate-certainty evidence). Higher-dose anticoagulants may result in little or no difference in deep vein thrombosis (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.03, 3422 participants; 4 RCTs), stroke (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.03, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), major adverse limb events (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99, 1176 participants; 2 RCTs), myocardial infarction (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.55, 4349 participants; 3 RCTs), atrial fibrillation (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.70, 562 participants; 1 study), or thrombocytopenia (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.24, 2789 participants; 2 RCTs) compared to lower-dose anticoagulants up to 30 days (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear whether higher-dose anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Anticoagulants versus no treatment (3 prospective NRS, 11,538 participants) Anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence is very uncertain due to two study results being at critical and serious risk of bias (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.74, 8395 participants; 3 NRS; very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if anticoagulants have any effect on necessity for additional respiratory support, mortality related to COVID-19, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, stroke, myocardial infarction and quality of life (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Ongoing studies We found 62 ongoing studies in hospital settings (60 RCTs, 35,470 participants; 2 prospective NRS, 120 participants) in 20 different countries. Thirty-five ongoing studies plan to report mortality and 26 plan to report necessity for additional respiratory support. We expect 58 studies to be completed in December 2021, and four in July 2022. From 60 RCTs, 28 are comparing different doses of anticoagulants, 24 are comparing anticoagulants versus no anticoagulants, seven are comparing different types of anticoagulants, and one did not report detail of the comparator group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared to a lower-dose regimen, higher-dose anticoagulants result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality and increase minor bleeding in people hospitalised with COVID-19 up to 30 days. Higher-dose anticoagulants possibly reduce pulmonary embolism, slightly increase major bleeding, may result in little to no difference in hospitalisation time, and may result in little to no difference in deep vein thrombosis, stroke, major adverse limb events, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, or thrombocytopenia.  Compared with no treatment, anticoagulants may reduce all-cause mortality but the evidence comes from non-randomised studies and is very uncertain. It is unclear whether anticoagulants have any effect on the remaining outcomes compared to no anticoagulants (very low-certainty evidence or no data). Although we are very confident that new RCTs will not change the effects of different doses of anticoagulants on mortality and minor bleeding, high-quality RCTs are still needed, mainly for the other primary outcome (necessity for additional respiratory support), the comparison with no anticoagulation, when comparing the types of anticoagulants and giving anticoagulants for a prolonged period of time.

The association between anticoagulation and adverse outcomes after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test among older outpatients: A population-based cohort study

Introduction

Anticoagulation may improve outcomes in patients with COVID-19 when started early in the course of illness.

Materials and methods

This was a population-based cohort study using linked administrative datasets of outpatients aged ≥65 years old testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 between January 1 and December 31, 2020 in Ontario, Canada. The key exposure was anticoagulation with warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants before COVID-19 diagnosis. We calculated propensity scores and used matching weights (MWs) to reduce baseline differences between anticoagulated and non-anticoagulated patients. The primary outcome was a composite of death or hospitalization within 60 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and cumulative incidence functions to estimate risk of the primary and component outcomes at 60 days.

Results

We studied 23,159 outpatients (mean age 78.5 years; 13,474 [58.2%] female), among whom 3200 (13.8%) deaths and 3183 (13.7%) hospitalizations occurred within 60 days of the SARS-CoV-2 test. After application of MWs, the 60-day risk of death or hospitalization was 29.2% (95% CI 27.4%–31.2%) for anticoagulated individuals and 32.1% (95% CI 30.7%–33.5%) without anticoagulation (absolute risk difference [ARD], −2.9%; p = 0.005). Anticoagulation was also associated with a lower risk of death: 18.6% (95% CI 17.0%–20.2%) with anticoagulation and 20.9% (95% CI 19.7%–22.2%) in non-anticoagulated patients (ARD -2.3%; p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Among outpatients aged ≥65 years, oral anticoagulation at the time of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test was associated with a lower risk of a composite of death or hospitalization within 60 days.

Pharmacogenetics and Precision Medicine Approaches for the Improvement of COVID-19 Therapies

Many drugs are being administered to tackle coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic situations without establishing clinical effectiveness or tailoring safety. A repurposing strategy might be more effective and successful if pharmacogenetic interventions are being considered in future clinical studies/trials. Although it is very unlikely that there are almost no pharmacogenetic data for COVID-19 drugs, however, from inferring the pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic(PD) properties and some pharmacogenetic evidence in other diseases/clinical conditions, it is highly likely that pharmacogenetic associations are also feasible in at least some COVID-19 drugs. We strongly mandate to undertake a pharmacogenetic assessment for at least these drug-gene pairs (atazanavir-UGT1A1, ABCB1, SLCO1B1, APOA5; efavirenz-CYP2B6; nevirapine-HLA, CYP2B6, ABCB1; lopinavir-SLCO1B3, ABCC2; ribavirin-SLC28A2; tocilizumab-FCGR3A; ivermectin-ABCB1; oseltamivir-CES1, ABCB1; clopidogrel-CYP2C19, ABCB1, warfarin-CYP2C9, VKORC1; non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)-CYP2C9) in COVID-19 patients for advancing precision medicine. Molecular docking and computational studies are promising to achieve new therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2 infection. The current situation in the discovery of anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents at four important targets from in silico studies has been described and summarized in this review. Although natural occurring compounds from different herbs against SARS-CoV-2 infection are favorable, however, accurate experimental investigation of these compounds is warranted to provide insightful information. Moreover, clinical considerations of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and drug-herb interactions (DHIs) of the existing repurposed drugs along with pharmacogenetic (e.g., efavirenz and CYP2B6) and herbogenetic (e.g., andrographolide and CYP2C9) interventions, collectively called multifactorial drug-gene interactions (DGIs), may further accelerate the development of precision COVID-19 therapies in the real-world clinical settings.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry

BACKGROUND

Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19.

METHODS

Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses.

RESULTS

7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM.

CONCLUSION

Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

COVID-19 and the cardiovascular system: insights into effects and treatments

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an acute and highly transmissible infectious disease, has reached a pandemic level since 11 March 2020 and continues to challenge the healthcare system worldwide. The pathogenesis of COVID-19 is a complex process involving mechanisms that suppress the host antiviral and innate immune response, while triggering marked activation of coagulation and hyperinflammation leading to cytokine storm in severe COVID-19. This review summarizes current evidence related to COVID-19-associated cardiovascular severe illness and mortality, which encompasses life-threatening clinical manifestations, including myocardial injury, fulminant myocarditis, cardiac arrhythmia, and ischemic stroke. The onset of hypercoagulable state is consistent with increased venous thromboembolism including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Thromboembolic manifestations include arterial thrombotic events such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and limb ischemia. Several treatment strategies have been investigated to mitigate COVID-19-associated cardiovascular clinical manifestations. The prevalence of thrombo-inflammatory syndrome and subsequent cardiovascular dysfunction prompted the implementation of antithrombotic therapy and strategies targeting major pro-inflammatory cytokines involved in COVID-19 cytokine storm. The development of new guidelines for effective treatment strategies requires concerted efforts to refine our understanding of the mechanisms underlying cardiovascular disease and large-scale clinical trials to reduce the burden of COVID-19 hospitalization and mortality.

Mechanisms of immunothrombosis in COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2. Over the past year, COVID-19 has posed a significant threat to global health. Although the infection is associated with mild symptoms in many patients, a significant proportion of patients develop a prothrombotic state due to a combination of alterations in coagulation and immune cell function. The purpose of this review is to discuss the pathophysiological characteristics of COVID-19 that contribute to the immunothrombosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Endotheliopathy during COVID-19 results in increased multimeric von Willebrand factor release and the potential for increased platelet adhesion to the endothelium. In addition, decreased anticoagulant proteins on the surface of endothelial cells further alters the hemostatic balance. Soluble coagulation markers are also markedly dysregulated, including plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and tissue factor, leading to COVID-19 induced coagulopathy. Platelet hyperreactivity results in increased platelet-neutrophil and -monocyte aggregates further exacerbating the coagulopathy observed during COVID-19. Finally, the COVID-19-induced cytokine storm primes neutrophils to release neutrophil extracellular traps, which trap platelets and prothrombotic proteins contributing to pulmonary thrombotic complications.

SUMMARY

Immunothrombosis significantly contributes to the pathophysiology of COVID-19. Understanding the mechanisms behind COVID-19-induced coagulopathy will lead to future therapies for patients.

Evaluation of Hospitalized Patient Outcomes in COVID-19 Infection for Continued versus Discontinued Use of Preadmission Antiplatelet Regimen

OBJECTIVE

In SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, it is unclear if continuation of preadmission antiplatelet regimens upon hospitalization will improve hypercoagulability outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed adult patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 infection for a 6-week period from March 13, 2020, to April 27, 2020. Preadmission antiplatelet regimen continuation for less than 75% of admission was compared to continuation for at least 75% of admission. Pregnancy, either death or withdrawal of care within 24 hours of admission, and admission beyond the studied timeframe were excluded. The primary endpoint was difference in World Health Organization COVID-19 Ordinal Scale for Clinical Improvement values (World Health Organization [WHO] scores) between maximum score during admission to that upon discharge. Secondary endpoints were mechanical ventilation requirement, mortality, radiologically confirmed venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and length of stay.

RESULTS

This study included 171 patients. Patients failing to continue antiplatelet regimens for at least 75% of admission (n = 76) had significantly worse WHO score differences than those who did (n = 95) (median -1 vs 2; P < .05). Mechanical ventilation requirement (57% vs 27%; P < .05) and mortality (58% vs 29%; P < .05) also favored antiplatelet continuation. All other endpoints were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Significantly improved WHO scores, mechanical ventilation requirement, and mortality occurred in patients continuing preadmission antiplatelet regimens in COVID-19 infection. Future prospective studies of COVID-19 patients with consistently collected baseline hypercoagulability markers (platelets, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and coagulation studies) and similar severe disease risk factors are required to confirm potential benefits of antiplatelet therapy during hospitalization.

Pharmacological Predictors of Morbidity and Mortality in COVID-19

The interaction of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with the majority of common prescriptions is broadly unknown. The purpose of this study is to identify medications associated with altered disease outcomes in COVID-19. A retrospective cohort composed of all adult inpatient admissions to our center with COVID-19 was analyzed. Data concerning all antecedent prescriptions were collected and agents brought forward for analysis if prescribed to at least 20 patients in our cohort. Forty-two medications and 22 classes of medication were examined. Groups were propensity score matched and analyzed by logistic and linear regression. The majority of medications did not show a statistically significant relationship with altered disease outcomes. Lower mortality was associated with use of pregabalin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.92; P = .049) and inhalers of any type (HR, 0.33; 95%CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .015), specifically beclomethasone (HR, 0.10; 95%CI, 0.01-0.82; P = .032), tiotropium (HR, 0.07; 95%CI, 0.01-0.83; P = .035), and steroid-containing inhalers (HR, 0.35; 95%CI, 0.15-0.79; P = .013). Gliclazide (HR, 4.37; 95%CI, 1.26-15.18; P = .020) and proton pump inhibitor (HR, 1.72; 95%CI, 1.06-2.79; P = .028) use was associated with greater mortality. Diuretic (HR, 0.07; 95%CI, 0.01-0.37; P = .002) and statin (HR, 0.35; 95%CI, 0.17-0.73; P = .006) use was associated with lower rates of critical care admission. Our data lends confidence to observing usual practice in patients with COVID-19 by continuing antecedent prescriptions in the absence of an alternative acute contraindication. We highlight potential benefits in investigation of diuretics, inhalers, pregabalin, and statins as therapeutic agents for COVID-19 and support further assessment of the safety of gliclazide and proton pump inhibitors in the acute illness.

Characteristics, risk factors and outcomes of gastrointestinal hemorrhage in COVID-19 patients: A meta-analysis

Background:

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), mainly targets the respiratory system. However, recent studies also show its role in causing gastrointestinal hemorrhage, potentially affecting morbidity and mortality-related outcomes of the patients. There is still no consensus on the risk factors, characteristics, and the overall outcome of the gastrointestinal hemorrhage in COVID-19 patients. The main aim of this study was to summarize current evidence, assessing risk factors that promote the onset of gastrointestinal hemorrhage in COVID-19 patients, and to compare the incidences of the different sites of gastrointestinal lesions, the events of abdominal pain, diarrhea, intensive care unit admissions, and mortality between COVID-19 patients with or without gastrointestinal bleeding.

Methods:

A search of the academic literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines across five databases i.e., Web of Science, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and MEDLINE. A random-effect meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the influence of the history of drugs consumption, gastrointestinal bleeding, the different incidence of gastrointestinal lesions, events of abdominal pain, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality between COVID-19 patients with/without gastrointestinal bleeding.

Results:

Out of 458 studies, three eligible studies with 663 participants (mean age: 69.7 ± 4.3 years) were included. A meta-analysis showed a medium-to-large influence of the history of gastrointestinal bleeding (Hedge’s g: 1.01) and anticoagulant drug consumption (g: 0.33) on the gastrointestinal bleeding in COVID-19 patients. Moreover, the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers was higher as compared to esophagitis (37.5% versus 9.9%).

Conclusions:

The study provides preliminary evidence regarding the risk factors associated with the onset of gastrointestinal hemorrhage among COVID-19 patients. The study also outlines the characteristics and the outcomes of gastrointestinal hemorrhage in COVID-19 patients.

Predictors of mortality of COVID-19 in the general population and nursing homes

The factors that predispose an individual to a higher risk of death from COVID-19 are poorly understood. The goal of the study was to identify factors associated with risk of death among patients with COVID-19. This is a retrospective cohort study of people with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from February to May 22, 2020. Data retrieved for this study included patient sociodemographic data, baseline comorbidities, baseline treatments, other background data on care provided in hospital or primary care settings, and vital status. Main outcome was deaths until June 29, 2020. In the multivariable model based on nursing home residents, predictors of mortality were being male, older than 80 years, admitted to a hospital for COVID-19, and having cardiovascular disease, kidney disease or dementia while taking anticoagulants or lipid-lowering drugs at baseline was protective. The AUC was 0.754 for the risk score based on this model and 0.717 in the validation subsample. Predictors of death among people from the general population were being male and/or older than 60 years, having been hospitalized in the month before admission for COVID-19, being admitted to a hospital for COVID-19, having cardiovascular disease, dementia, respiratory disease, liver disease, diabetes with organ damage, or cancer while being on anticoagulants was protective. The AUC was 0.941 for this model's risk score and 0.938 in the validation subsample. Our risk scores could help physicians identify high-risk groups and establish preventive measures and better follow-up for patients at high risk of dying.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04463706.

Pre-hospital antiplatelet medication use on COVID-19 disease severity

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between pre-hospitalization antiplatelet medication use and COVID-19 disease severity.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Inpatient units at The Mount Sinai Hospital.

PATIENTS

Adults age ≥18 admitted between March 1, 2020 and April 9, 2020 with confirmed COVID-19 infection with at least 28 days follow-up.

MEASUREMENTS

We captured baseline demographic, pre-hospitalization antiplatelet medication use, and clinical encounter data for all patients who met inclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was peak score on a 6-point modified ordinal scale (MOS), which is based on World Health Organization blueprint R&S groups, used to grade severity of illness through clinical outcomes of interest. Scores indicate the following: 1 - COVID-19 infection not requiring hospitalization, 2 - requiring hospitalization but not supplemental oxygen, 3 - hospitalization requiring supplemental oxygen, 4 - hospitalization requiring high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) or non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), 5 - hospitalization requiring intubation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), 6 - death. Multivariable adjusted partial proportional odds model (PPOM) was performed to examine the association between pre-hospitalization antiplatelet medication use and likelihood of each MOS score.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 762 people admitted with COVID-19, 239 (31.4%) used antiplatelet medications pre-hospitalization while 523 (68.6%) did not. Antiplatelet users were older and had more co-morbidities at baseline. Before adjusting for covariates, patients who used antiplatelet medications pre-hospitalization were more likely than non-users to have peak MOS score 6 (death, OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.21-2.52), peak MOS score ≥5 (intubation/ECMO or death, OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.00-1.98) and peak MOS score ≥4 (HFNC, NIPPV, intubation/ECMO or death, OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.01-1.94). On multivariable adjusted PPOM analysis controlling for 13 covariates, there were no longer any significant differences in peak MOS scores between users and non-users.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjusting for covariates, pre-hospital antiplatelet use was not associated with COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients.

The effect of chronic DOAC treatment on clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Recent findings indicate that thrombosis is one of the underlying pathophysiology and complication of COVID-19 infection. Therefore, the prognosis of the disease may be more favourable in people who were under oral anticoagulant treatment before the COVID-19 diagnosis. This study aims to evaluate the effects of chronic DOAC use on ICU admission and mortality in hospitalized patients due to COVID-19 infection.

METHOD

Between 1 September and 30 November 2020, 2760 patients hospitalized in our hospital due to COVID-19 were screened. A total of 1710 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups as those who use DOAC due to any cardiovascular disease before the COVID-19 infection and those who do not.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were enrolled in the DOAC group and 1631 patients in the non-DOAC group. Median age of all study patient was 62 (52-71 IQR) and 860 (50.5%) of them were female. The need for intensive care, in-hospital stay, and mechanical ventilation were observed at higher rates in the DOAC group. Mortality was observed in 23 patients (29%) in the DOAC group, and it was statistically higher in the DOAC group (P = .002). In the multivariable analysis, age (OR: 1.047, CI: 1.02-1.06, P < .001), male gender (OR: 1.8, CI: 1.3-2.7, P = .02), lymphocyte count (OR: 0.45, CI: 0.30-0.69, P < .001), procalcitonin (OR: 1.12, CI: 1.02-1.23, P = .015), SaO₂ (OR: 0.8, CI: 0.77-0.82, P < .001) and creatinine (OR: 2.59, CI: 1.3-5.1, P = .006) were found to be associated with in-hospital mortality. DOAC treatment was not found to be associated with lower in-hospital mortality in multivariable analysis (OR:1.17, CI: 0.20-6.60, P = .850).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the use of DOAC prior to hospitalization had no protective effect on in-hospital mortality and intensive care need in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 related venous thromboembolism

COVID-19 pneumonia has been associated with high rates of thrombo-embolic complications, mostly venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is thought to be a combination of conventional VTE and in situ immunothrombosis in the pulmonary vascular tree. The incidence of thrombotic complications is dependent on setting (intensive care unit (ICU) versus general ward) and the threshold for performing diagnostic tests (screening versus diagnostic algorithms triggered by symptoms). Since these thrombotic complications are associated with in-hospital mortality, all current guidelines and consensus papers propose pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in all hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Several trials are ongoing to study the optimal intensity of anticoagulation for this purpose. As for the management of thrombotic complications, treatment regimens from non-COVID-19 guidelines can be adapted, with choice of anticoagulant drug class dependent on the situation. Parenteral anticoagulation is preferred for patients on ICUs or with impending clinical deterioration, while oral treatment can be started in stable patients. This review describes current knowledge on incidence and pathophysiology of COVID-19 associated VTE and provides an overview of guideline recommendations on thromboprophylaxis and treatment of established VTE in COVID-19 patients.

The influence of pre-admission antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy on the illness severity in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Japan

Introduction

Many articles have reported that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes coagulation abnormalities and pulmonary thrombosis, contributing to a poorer prognosis. The study aimed to evaluate whether pre-admission anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy prevented severe COVID-19 illness or not.

Materials and methods

We conducted a study to determine whether taking antiplatelet or anticoagulation agents before admission affected the severity on admission using a large nationwide cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Japan. We analyzed a large nationwide cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Japan from February 9 to July 31, 2020.

Results and conclusion

A total of 4265 patients from 342 facilities in Japan were included. Their use was associated with a slight reduction in the disease severity on admission in a propensity score-matched analysis which controlled for underlying diseases. However, this difference was not statistically significant.

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants use prior to COVID-19 diagnosis and associations with 30-day clinical outcomes

Background

It is unclear if direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) use before hospitalization due to COVID-19 diagnosis would potentially impact the severity and clinical outcomes thereafter. We compared 30-day hospitalization/re-hospitalization and clinical outcomes between patients on chronic DOAC therapy and patients not on oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Methods

We used data from TriNetX, a global federated health research network. Patients aged ≥18 years who were treated with DOACs at time of COVID-19 diagnosis between 20 January 2020 and 28 February 2021 were included, and matched with patients not on OAC therapy from the same period. All patients were followed-up at 30-days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, hospitalization/re-hospitalization, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH).

Results

738,423 patients were included. After propensity score matching (PSM), 26,006 patients remained in the study (13,003 on DOACs; 13,003 not on OAC). DOAC-treated patients (mean age 67.1 ± 15.4 years, 52.2% male) had higher relative risks (RRs) and lower 30-days event-free survival as compared to patients not on OAC for all-cause mortality (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12–1.44; Log-Rank test p = 0.010), hospitalization/re-hospitalization (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.64–1.82; Log-Rank test p < 0.001) and VTE (RR 4.51, 95% CI 3.91–5.82; Log-Rank test p < 0.001), but not for ICH (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.54–1.51; Log-Rank test p = 0.513).

Conclusion

In COVID-19 patients, previous DOAC therapy at time of diagnosis was not associated with improved clinical outcomes or lower hospitalization/re-hospitalization rate compared to patients not taking OAC therapy.

Impact of pre-admission antithrombotic therapy on disease severity and mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19

Anticoagulant therapy is a cornerstone treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to the high rates of thromboembolic complications associated with this disease. We hypothesized that chronic antithrombotic therapy could play a protective role in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Retrospective, observational study of all patients admitted to our hospital for ≥ 24 h from March 1 to May 31, 2020 with SARS-CoV-2. The objective was to evaluate clinical outcomes and mortality in COVID-19 patients receiving chronic anticoagulation (AC) or antiplatelet therapy (AP) prior to hospital admission. A total of 1612 patients were evaluated. The mean (standard deviation; SD) age was 66.5 (17.1) years. Patients were divided into three groups according to the use of antithrombotic therapy prior to admission (AP, AC, or no-antithrombotic treatment). At admission, 9.6% of the patients were taking anticoagulants and 19.1% antiplatelet therapy. The overall mortality rate was 19.3%. On the multivariate analysis there were no significant differences in mortality between the antithrombotic groups (AC or AP) and the no-antithrombotic group (control group). Patients on AC had lower ICU admission rates than the control group (OR: 0.41, 95% CI, 0.18–0.93). Anticoagulation therapy prior to hospitalization for COVID-19 was associated with lower ICU admission rates. However, there were no significant differences in mortality between the patients receiving chronic antithrombotic therapy and patients not taking antithrombotic medications. These findings suggest that chronic anticoagulation therapy at the time of COVID-19 infection may reduce disease severity and thus the need for ICU admission.

Association between risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality in patients with COVID-19

Objectives

To investigate the association of risk of venous thromboembolism with 30-day mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

A total of 1030 COVID-19 patients were retrospectively collected, with baseline data on demographics, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and VTE risk assessment models (RAMs), including Padua prediction score (PPS), International Medical Prevention Registry (IMPROVE), and Caprini.

Results

Thirty-day mortality increased progressively from 2% in patients at low VTE risk to 63% in those at high risk defined by PPS. Similar findings were observed in IMPROVE and Caprini scores. Progressive increases in VTE risk were also associated with higher SOFA score. High risk of VTE was independently associated with mortality regardless of adjusted gender, smoking status and some comorbidities, with hazard ratios of 29.19, 37.37 and 20.60 for PPS, IMPROVE and Caprini RAM, respectively (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). The predictive accuracy of PPS (area under curve (AUC) 0.900), IMPROVE (AUC 0.917), or Caprini (AUC 0.861) RAM for risk of hospitalized mortality was unexpectedly strong.

Conclusions

We established that the presence of a high risk of VTE identifies a group of COVID-19 patients at higher risk for mortality. Furthermore, there is a high accuracy of VTE RAMs to predict mortality in these patients.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation and Clinical Outcome in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

PURPOSE

The clinical course of COVID-19 may be complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and thromboembolic events, which are associated with high risk of mortality. Although previous studies reported a lower rate of death in patients treated with heparin, the potential benefit of chronic oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the association between OAT with the risk of ARDS and mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This is a multicenter retrospective Italian study including consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from March 1 to April 22, 2020, at six Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into two groups according to the chronic assumption of oral anticoagulants.

RESULTS

Overall, 427 patients were included; 87 patients (19%) were in the OAT group. Of them, 54 patients (13%) were on treatment with non-vitamin k oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and 33 (8%) with vitamin-K antagonists (VKAs). OAT patients were older and had a higher rate of hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease compared to No-OAT group. The rate of ARDS at admission (26% vs 28%, P=0.834), or developed during the hospitalization (9% vs 10%, P=0.915), was similar between study groups; in-hospital mortality (22% vs 26%, P=0.395) was also comparable. After balancing for potential confounders by using the propensity score matching technique, no differences were found in term of clinical outcome between OAT and No-OAT patients CONCLUSION: Oral anticoagulation therapy, either NOACs or VKAs, did not influence the risk of ARDS or death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Preexisting Oral Anticoagulant Therapy Ameliorates Prognosis in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

Objective: Altered coagulation parameters in COVID-19 patients is associated with a poor prognosis. We tested whether COVID-19 patients on chronic oral anticoagulants (cOACs) for thromboembolism prophylaxis could receive protection from developing more severe phenotypes of the disease.

Approach and Results: We searched the database of the SARS-RAS study (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04331574), a cross-sectional observational multicenter nationwide survey in Italy designed by the Italian Society of Hypertension. The database counts 2,377 charts of Italian COVID-19 patients in 26 hospitals. We calculated the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), which is associated with death in COVID-19 patients. In our population (n = 2,377, age 68.2 ± 0.4 years, CCI: 3.04 ± 0.04), we confirm that CCI is associated with increased mortality [OR: 1.756 (1.628-1.894)], admission to intensive care units [ICU; OR: 1.074 (1.017-1.134)], and combined hard events [CHE; OR: 1.277 (1.215-1.342)]. One hundred twenty-five patients were on cOACs (age: 79.3 ± 0.9 years, CCI: 4.35 ± 0.13); despite the higher CCI, cOACs patients presented with a lower risk of admissions to the ICU [OR 0.469 (0.250-0.880)] but not of death [OR: 1.306 (0.78-2.188)] or CHE [OR: 0.843 (0.541-1.312)]. In multivariable logistic regression, cOACs confirmed their protective effect on ICU admission and CHE. The CCI remains the most important risk factor for ICU admission, death, and CHE.

Conclusions: Our data support a mechanism for the continuation of cOAC therapy after hospital admission for those patients who are on chronic treatment. Our preliminary results suggest the prophylactic use of direct cOACs in patients with elevated CCI score at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic even in absence of other risks of thromboembolism.

A Case Series of Life-Threatening Hemorrhagic Events in Patients with COVID-19

Since venous microthrombotic and thromboembolic events in end organs have been pathophysiologically confirmed as a component of thrombo-inflammatory cascade in COVID-19 syndrome, anticoagulant prescription with prophylactic or therapeutic goal is recommended. Different guidelines for the above are introduced; however, there is no general consensus on any neither the type of anticoagulant nor for the dosage and duration of prescription. In our medical center, adopted internal guideline was considered for patients COVID-19. We consulted patients with COVID-19 who suffered from concurrent hematoma. Appropriate surgical approach was considered. Finally autopsy study was performed for patients. In this article, we presented a series of seven SARS-CoV-2 confirmed cases faced with bleeding complication following initiation of anticoagulation protocol. The rectus sheath hematoma with extension to pelvic and/or retroperitoneal space, even involving bowel mesentery was seen most commonly. Despite receiving appropriate surgical care, all seven cases died. Finally, in all cases, autopsy studies revealed no evidence for confirmation of DIC/SIC or organ failure as the reason of death although pulmonary involvement with SARS-CoV-2 and bleeding phenomena were approved. The nature of the COVID-19 syndrome makes patients vulnerable to hemorrhagic events following anticoagulant administration which relatively causes or accelerates patient's expiration.

Decreased in-hospital mortality associated with aspirin administration in hospitalized patients due to severe COVID-19

Hypercoagulability and thrombosis caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) are related to the higher mortality rate. Because of limited data on the antiplatelet effect, we aimed to evaluate the impact of aspirin add‐on therapy on the outcome of the patients hospitalized due to severe COVID‐19. In this cohort study, patients with a confirmed diagnosis of severe COVID‐19 admitted to Imam Hossein Medical Center, Tehran, Iran from March 2019 to July 2020 were included. Demographics and related clinical data during their hospitalization were recorded. The mortality rate of the patients was considered as the primary outcome and its association with aspirin use was assessed. Nine hundred and ninety‐one patients were included, of that 336 patients (34%) received aspirin during their hospitalization and 655 ones (66%) did not. Comorbidities were more prevalent in the patients who were receiving aspirin. Results from the multivariate COX proportional model demonstrated a significant independent association between aspirin use and reduction in the risk of in‐hospital mortality (0.746 [0.560–0.994], p = 0.046). Aspirin use in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 is associated with a significant decrease in mortality rate. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the efficacy and adverse effects of aspirin administration in this population.

Aspirin administration decrease the rate of mortality in hospitalized patients with severe COVID‐19, independently.

Although the crude analysis showed higher mortality rate in patients recieved aspirin, these patients have higher rate of underlying conditions.

By performing stepwise COX regression analysis and adjusting the effect of comorbidities, aspirin administration was protective in hospitalized patients with severe COVID‐19.

Rationale and design for the study of rivaroxaban to reduce thrombotic events, hospitalization and death in outpatients with COVID-19: The PREVENT-HD study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is associated with both venous and arterial thrombotic complications. While prophylactic anticoagulation is now widely recommended for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the effectiveness and safety of thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19 has not been established.

STUDY DESIGN

PREVENT-HD is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, pragmatic, event-driven phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in symptomatic outpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 at risk for thrombotic events, hospitalization, and death. Several challenges posed by the pandemic have necessitated innovative approaches to clinical trial design, start-up, and conduct. Participants are randomized in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by time from COVID-19 confirmation, to either rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily or placebo for 35 days. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia, non-central nervous system systemic embolization, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety end point is fatal and critical site bleeding according to the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis definition. Enrollment began in August 2020 and is expected to enroll approximately 4,000 participants to yield the required number of end point events.

CONCLUSIONS

PREVENT-HD is a pragmatic trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of the direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban in the outpatient setting to reduce major venous and arterial thrombotic events, hospitalization, and mortality associated with COVID-19.

Anticoagulation outcomes in hospitalized Covid-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Coagulopathy and thromboembolic events are common in Covid-19 patients and are poor prognostic factors. Controversy exists regarding the potential of anticoagulation (AC) to reduce mortality and incidence of thromboembolic events in Covid-19 patients. The current systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the association between anticoagulants and mortality in adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients using the available published non-randomized studies.

METHODS

Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials.gov were searched for relevant studies. A meta-analysis of adjusted and unadjusted estimates was performed. The relative risk was used as a measure of effect. The random-effects model was used to pool estimates using the generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the quantitative data synthesis. Results showed a statistically significant association between AC and mortality (RR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.36; 0.92, p = 0.02). Both therapeutic (Relative risk [RR] = 0.4, 95% CI 0.27; 0.57) and prophylactic AC (RR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.41; 0.71) were associated with lower risk of mortality. Pre-admission AC was not associated with mortality (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.49; 1.43, p > 0.05) while prophylactic AC was associated with higher risk of mortality compared to therapeutic AC (RR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.34; 1.87, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Findings support the association of AC with mortality in Covid-19 patients. The results, synthesized from mostly low-quality studies, show that prophylactic and therapeutic AC might reduce mortality in Covid-19 patients. Findings suggest that therapeutic doses might be associated with better survival compared to prophylactic doses.

Effect of anticoagulant therapy in COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, an increased incidence of thromboembolic events, such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis and stroke, has been reported. It is unknown whether anticoagulation can prevent these complications and improve outcome.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to answer the question: What is the effect of (prophylactic and therapeutic dose) anticoagulation therapy in COVID-19 patients on cardiovascular and thromboembolic complications and clinical outcome? Relevant outcome measures were mortality (crucial), hospital admission, length of stay, thromboembolic complications (pulmonary embolism, stroke, transient ischaemic attack), need for mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury and use of renal replacement therapy. Medline and Embase databases were searched with relevant search terms until 17 July 2020. After systematic analysis, eight studies were included. Analysis was stratified for the start of anticoagulation before or during hospital admission.

RESULTS

There was insufficient evidence that therapeutic anticoagulation could improve the outcome in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. None of the studies demonstrated improved mortality, except for one very small Italian study. Furthermore, none of the studies showed a positive effect of anticoagulation on other outcome measures in COVID-19, such as ICU admission, length of hospital stay, thromboembolic complications, need for mechanical ventilation, acute kidney failure or need for renal replacement therapy, except for two studies demonstrating an association between anticoagulation and a lower incidence of pulmonary embolism. However, the level of evidence of all studies varied from 'low' to 'very low', according to the GRADE methodology.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of the literature showed that there was insufficient evidence to answer our objective on the effect of anticoagulation on outcome in COVID-19 patients, especially due to the low scientific quality of the described studies. Randomised controlled studies are needed to answer this question.

The Year in Coagulation: Selected Highlights from 2020

This is the second annual review in the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia to cover highlights in coagulation for cardiac surgery. The goal of this article is to provide readers with a focused summary from the literature of the prior year's most important coagulation topics. In 2020, this included a discussion covering allogeneic transfusion, antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy, factor concentrates, coagulation testing, mechanical circulatory support, and the effects of coronavirus disease 2019.

Direct oral anticoagulant use and risk of severe COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Hypercoagulability and thromboembolism are prominent features of severe COVID-19, and ongoing anticoagulant use might be protective.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide register-based cohort study in Sweden, February through May, 2020, to assess whether ongoing direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use was associated with reduced risk of hospital admission for laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, or a composite of intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death due to laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.

RESULTS

DOAC use (n = 103 703) was not associated with reduced risk of hospital admission for COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] [95% confidence interval] 1.00 [0.75-1.33] vs. nonuse atrial fibrillation comparator [n = 36 875]; and aHR 0.94 [0.80-1.10] vs. nonuse cardiovascular disease comparator [n = 355 699]), or ICU admission or death due to COVID-19 (aHRs 0.76 [0.51-1.12], and 0.90 [0.71-1.15], respectively).

CONCLUSION

Ongoing DOAC use was not associated with reduced risk of severe COVID-19, indicating that prognosis would not be modified by early outpatient DOAC initiation.