Acute Circulatory Collapse and Advanced Therapies in Patients with COVID-19 Infection

Fulminant Myocarditis and Cardiogenic Shock Following COVID-19 Infection Versus COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Myocarditis, diagnosed by symptoms and troponin elevation, has been well-described with COVID-19 infection, as well as shortly after COVID-19 vaccination. The literature has characterized the outcomes of myocarditis following COVID-19 infection and vaccination, but clinicopathologic, hemodynamic, and pathologic features following fulminant myocarditis have not been well-characterized. We aimed to compare clinical and pathological features of fulminant myocarditis requiring hemodynamic support with vasopressors/inotropes and mechanical circulatory support (MCS), in these two conditions.

METHODS

We analyzed the literature on fulminant myocarditis and cardiogenic shock associated with COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination and systematically reviewed all cases and case series where individual patient data were presented. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar for "COVID", "COVID-19", and "coronavirus" in combination with "vaccine", "fulminant myocarditis", "acute heart failure", and "cardiogenic shock". The Student's t-test was used for continuous variables and the χ2 statistic was used for categorical variables. For non-normal data distributions, the Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test was used for statistical comparisons.

RESULTS

We identified 73 cases and 27 cases of fulminant myocarditis associated with COVID-19 infection (COVID-19 FM) and COVID-19 vaccination (COVID-19 vaccine FM), respectively. Fever, shortness of breath, and chest pain were common presentations, but shortness of breath and pulmonary infiltrates were more often present in COVID-19 FM. Tachycardia, hypotension, leukocytosis, and lactic acidosis were seen in both cohorts, but patients with COVID-19 FM were more tachycardic and hypotensive. Histologically, lymphocytic myocarditis dominated both subsets, with some cases of eosinophilic myocarditis in both cohorts. Cellular necrosis was seen in 44.0% and 47.8% of COVID-19 FM and COVID-19 vaccine FM, respectively. Vasopressors and inotropes were used in 69.9% of COVID-19 FM and in 63.0% of the COVID-19 vaccine FM. Cardiac arrest was observed more in COVID-19 FM (p = 0.008). Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support for cardiogenic shock was also used more commonly in the COVID-19 fulminant myocarditis group (p = 0.0293). Reported mortality was similar (27.7%) and 27.8%, respectively) but was likely worse for COVID-19 FM as the outcome was still unknown in 11% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first series to retrospectively assess fulminant myocarditis associated with COVID-19 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination, we found that both conditions had a similarly high mortality rate, while COVID-19 FM had a more malignant course with more symptoms on presentation, more profound hemodynamic decompensation (higher heart rate, lower blood pressure), more cardiac arrests, and higher temporary MCS requirements including VA-ECMO. In terms of pathology, there was no difference in most biopsies/autopsies that demonstrated lymphocytic infiltrates and some eosinophilic or mixed infiltrates. There was no predominance of young males in COVID-19 vaccine FM cases, with male patients representing only 40.9% of the cohort.

Coronavirus disease 2019 and mechanical circulatory support devices: a comprehensive review

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) can cause circulatory shock refractory to medical therapy. Such patients can be managed with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices like IABP, Impella, VA ECMO, and Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs). Moreover, patients on long-term durable LVADs are a special population having increased susceptibility and mortality to COVID-19 infection. In this narrative review, we searched PubMed and Medline for studies on COVID-19 patients on short-term MCS devices. We found 36 papers with 110 patients who met our review criteria, including 89 LVAD patients and 21 COVID-19 patients who needed MCS device therapy. These studies were used to extract patient demographics, clinical presentation, MCS device details, management, and outcomes. Mean age of patients with COVID-19 infection on LVADs was 60, 73% were male, and HeartMate 3 was the most common device (53%). Most patients (77.5%) needed hospitalization, and mortality was 23.6%. Among the 21 reported cases of critically ill COVID-19 patients who required MCS, the mean age was 49.8 years, 52% were women, and the most common MCS device used was VA ECMO (62%) in conjunction with an Impella for LV venting. Comorbidities were not present in 43%, but 71% had abnormal ventricular function on echocardiography. MCS is a viable option for managing severe COVID-19 infection with shock, with many reported cases of favorable outcomes.