Clinical Outcomes of Anticoagulated Patients With Atrial Fibrillation After Falls or Head Injury: Insights From RE-LY

BACKGROUND

Falls are always a concern regarding the balance of risk/benefit in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with anticoagulants. In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients that had a fall/head injury reported in the RE-LY clinical trial (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy) and to explore the safety of dabigatran (a nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant).

METHODS

We performed a post hoc retrospective analysis of intracranial hemorrhage and major bleeding outcomes in the RE-LY trial with 18 113 individuals with atrial fibrillation, according to the status occurrence of falls (or head injury) reported as adverse events. Multivariate Cox regression models were used to provide adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

In the study, 974 falls or head injury events were reported among 716 patients (4%). These patients were older and had more frequently comorbidities such as diabetes, previous stroke, or coronary artery disease. Patients with fall had a higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 2.41 [95% CI, 1.90-3.05]), intracranial hemorrhage (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.35-2.13]), and mortality (HR, 3.91 [95% CI, 2.51-6.10]) compared to those who did not have reported falls or head injury. Among patients who had falls, those allocated to dabigatran showed a lower intracranial hemorrhage risk (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.18-0.98]) compared with warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, the risk of falls is important and confers a worse prognosis, increasing intracranial hemorrhage, and major bleeding. Patients who fell and were under dabigatran was associated with lower intracranial hemorrhage risk than those anticoagulated with warfarin, but the analysis was merely exploratory.

Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries: Etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis

Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) is responsible for 10% of myocardial infarctions. Previously, patients were thought to have good prognosis, but evidence-based management and treatment strategies were scarce. Today, researchers and physicians recognize MINOCA as a condition with non-trivial mortality and morbidity. Therapeutic strategies are highly dependent on the underlying disease mechanism in each patient. However, to reach a diagnosis of MINOCA, a multimodal approach is required and, even with an optimal work-up, the cause remains unknown in 8-25% of patients. Research has been growing and position papers from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology have been published, and MINOCA has been included in the more recent ESC guidelines on myocardial infarction. Nonetheless, some clinicians still assume that the absence of coronary obstruction excludes the possibility of acute myocardial infarction. Therefore, in the present paper, we aim to compile and present the available data on the etiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of MINOCA.

Prognostic Accuracy of the Modified CHA2DS2-VASc Score in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department Due to Clinical Worsening

INTRODUCTION

Risk factors comprising the CHA2DS2VASc score are recognized as risk factors for venous thromboembolism and mortality in COVID-19 patients. A modified CHA2DS2VASc score (M-CHA2D2VASc), developed by changing gender criteria from female to male, has been proposed to predict in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic accuracy of M-CHA2D2VASc for adverse clinical outcomes and short-term mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to the Emergency Department.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study of patients admitted to the ED who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography due to suspected pulmonary embolism or clinical worsening. Patients were stratified into three M-CHA2DS2-VASc risk-categories: low (0 - 1 points), intermediate (2 - 3 points) and high-risk (≥ 4 points).

RESULTS

We included 300 patients (median age 71 years, 59% male). The overall mortality was 27%. The M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was higher in non-survivors compared to survivors [4 (IQR:3 - 5) vs 2 (IQR: 1 - 4), respectively, p < 0.001). The M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was identified as an independent predictor of mortality in a multivariable logistic regression model (OR 1.406, p = 0.007). The Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that the M-CHA2DS2-VASc score was associated with short-term mortality (log-rank test < 0.001), regardless of hospitalization (log-rank test p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively). The survival proportion was 92%, 80% and 63% in the lower, intermediate, and higher risk-groups. As for the risk-categories, no difference was found in pulmonary embolism, Intensive Care Unit admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to validate M-CHA2DS2-VASc score as a predictor of short-term mortality in patients admitted to the Emergency Department.

CONCLUSION

The M-CHA2DS2-VASC score might be useful for prompt risk-stratification in COVID-19 patients during admission to the Emergency Department.

[Digital home-based multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation: How to counteract physical inactivity during the COVID-19 pandemic]

Introduction and Objectives

Center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs have been forced to close due to COVID-19. Alternative delivery models to maintain access to CR programs and to avoid physical inactivity should be considered. The aim of this study was to assess physical activity (PA) levels after completing a home-based digital CR program.

Methods

A total of 116 cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients (62.6±8.9 years, 95 male) who had been attending a face-to-face CR program were recruited and assessed (baseline and at three months) on the following parameters: PA, sedentary behavior, adherence, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular symptoms, feelings toward the pandemic, dietary habits, risk factor control, safety and adverse events. The intervention consisted of a multidisciplinary digital CR program, including regular patient assessment, and exercise, educational and psychological group sessions.

Results

Ninety-eight CVD patients successfully completed all the online assessments (15.5% drop-out rate). A favorable main effect of time was an increase in moderate to vigorous PA and a decrease in sedentary time at three months. Almost half of the participants completed at least one online exercise training session per week and attended at least one of the online educational sessions. No major adverse events were reported and only one minor event occurred.

Conclusion

During the pandemic, levels of moderate to vigorous PA improved after three months of home-based CR in CVD patients with previous experience in a face-to-face CR model. Diversified CR programs with a greater variety of content tailored to individual preferences are needed to meet the motivational and clinical requirements of CVD patients.

Pulmonary embolism and COVID-19: A comparative analysis of different diagnostic models performance

OBJECTIVE

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several diagnostic prediction rules based on pretest probability and D-dimer have been validated in non-COVID patients, but it remains unclear if they can be safely applied in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the standard approach based on Wells and Geneva scores combined with a standard D-dimer cut-off of 500 ng/mL with three alternative strategies (age-adjusted, YEARS and PEGeD algorithms) in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all COVID-19 patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED) who underwent computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) due to PE suspicion. The diagnostic prediction rules for PE were compared between patients with and without PE.

RESULTS

We included 300 patients and PE was confirmed in 15%. No differences were found regarding comorbidities, traditional risk factors for PE and signs and symptoms between patients with and without PE. Wells and Geneva scores showed no predictive value for PE occurrence, whether a standard or an age-adjusted cut-off was considered. YEARS and PEGeD algorithms were associated with increased specificity (19% CTPA reduction) but raising non-diagnosed PE. Despite elevated in all patients, those with PE had higher D-dimer levels. However, incrementing thresholds to select patients for CTPA was also associated with a substantial decrease in sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

None of the diagnostic prediction rules are reliable predictors of PE in COVID-19. Our data favour the use of a D-dimer threshold of 500 ng/mL, considering that higher thresholds increase specificity but limits this strategy as a screening test.